India - 2.3 Flashcards
first round table conference
- November 1930- January 1931
- three British political parties (Labour Party by the Ramsay MacDonald, Conservative group by Samual Hoare and Liberal group Lord Reading)
- 58 delegates representing all shades of Indian political opinion
- no congress present
- despite this, progress was made
how did the princes influence the first round table conference?
- sent 16 representatives
- this was unexpected and their support for the concept of dominion status strengthened the case of the Labour government claims
- they established clear policy backed up with evidence
outcome of the first round table conference
- India would be run as a type of dominion
- it would be a federation including princely states and 11 British provinces
- there would be Indian participation in all levels of government
- this was accepted by progressive British and moderate Indians, but Churchill and congress were not content.
the inauguration of new Delhi
- the British made this the administrative capital of the Raj (used to be Calcutta)
- the new secretariat buildings and viceroy’s residence were designed to convey the solemnity and permanence of the Raj
- the acropolis had four columns representing the four dominions. this suggested India would soon join.
- this contradicted the compromises made at the first round table conference.
the second round table conference
- September-december 1931
- similar mix of delegates to the first
- the Gandhi-irwin pact made it possible for congress to attend (Gandhi being the only representative)
- he hoped to symbolise the unity of Indian nationalists
- no workable solution
why did the second round table conference fail?
- Congress had decided on prune swaraj and therefore refused to accept any other decision
- Gandhi was particular opposed the untouchables being considered a separate electorate as they should be considered under the Hindu umbrella.
- The Aga Kahn
- Jinnah representing the Muslim League
- Tara Singh the Sikhs
- Dr Ambedkar the untouchables
- all demanded separate electorates
- Hindus and muslims couldn’t agree
- there was a brewing alliance between the muslims and princes and this threatened Congress’ majority.
the third round table conference
- November-December 1932
- doomed before it started as only 46 delegates attended
- none from the British Labour Party or Congress
- it discussed the franchise, finance and the role of princely states
- no conclusion due to a lack of representatives and confusion.
How did the situation in Britain lead to failure of the round table conference?
- August 1931 the Labour Party resigned and replaced by the national government
- they were facing the depression and the abdication of the King - more pressing than Indian question
- new Secretary of State (Samuel Hoare) had more reservation than his predecessors
- Churchill campaigned against Indian independence. he set up the Indian Defence league with support form 50 conservative MPs wanting Indian subordination.
- the labour party had internal problems and didn’t send any representatives to the third conference.
- always on British terrain and so Eurocentric decision
why did congress leas to the failure of the RTC?
- not at first one (Nehru and Gandhi in jail)
- gandhi was adamant that he alone could speak for India (inc muslims)
- he alienated groups seeking separate representation 9e.g. muslims)
- he had a pre-decided agenda and was reluctant to compromise
why did divisions over separate electorates lead to failure of the RTC?
- having such a range of delegates made it impossible to satisfy everyones demands leading to confusion and tension
- Jinnah’s tactics made it worse, of playing one group against another as he sought to gain greater concessions for the muslims
- the British supported the idea of separate electorates, drawing them into contention w Gandhi.
- after each one there was a different decision. this create a lack of consistency and clarity
viceroy Willingdon
- had worked as governor of Bombay and though of Gandhi as a dangerous Bolshevik, colouring his attitude to nationalism
- he resented gandhi-irwin pact and adopted stricter measures.
- he commissioned the Lloyd barrage across the Indus River, providing work for thousands
Indian reaction to the failure of consultation
- helped only those prepared to work with the administration
- Gandhi arrested
- congress outlawed
- all members of Congress Working Committee were imprisoned
- youth organisation banned
- this increased terrorist activity, more women got involved and common boycotts of British hoods
- however, the police never lost control for very long
the communal award
- august 1932
- this designated Sikhs, Indian Christians, anglo-Indians, muslims and untouchables as separate classes and therefore entitled to separate electorates
- Gandhi was furious he had wanted to remove the untouchable stigma and saw them as Hindu
- saw it as the British trying to weaken congress
- he launched a fast-unto death, blackmailing them to withdraw the award
the yervada (poona) Pact
- September 1932
- Willingdon didn’t want Gandhi to die and inflate the importance of his cause.
- congress didn’t want to lose their leader
- many Hindu leaders met in Bombay to decide on a set of proposals that they took to Poona where Gandhi was in Yervada jail.
- the communal award was for an allocation of 71 seats on the provincial legislatures to the untouchables. Gandhi decided on 148, elected by primary and secondary elections for seats allocated to untouchables.
how did the yervada pact impact the untouchables?
- untouchables would be allocated 18% of the centra. assembly seats as long as they stood for general election
- this led to an abandonment of separate electorates as it created reserved seats but voting was by the general electorate
- a specific sum of money was to be set aside by every provincial assembly for untouchable education.
- Hindus declared that untouchables should have the same rights (untouchability abolition week).
- yet took 20 years before untouchability was abolished by law
how did the British government react to the yervada pact?
- made the adjustments to the new Indian constitution
- however the RTC showed there were deep divisions between the Indian populations and therefore struggled to come to agreements
- this convinced them the GoIA was needed.
Joseph Rudyard Kipling
- British journalist and Cabinet during WW1
- he grew up in a British Raj setting with much of his work being centred around Indian life (e.g. the Jungle Book)
- vie president of the Indian Defence League and a strong imperialist
daily mail
- Lord Rothermere was the proprietor and wrote a series of article under the general heading ‘if we lose India’
- laced with distorted ‘facts’ like Congress being an insignificant group of semi-educated Hindus and fake photos of British troops quelling riots.
- gave the message that the Indians were unfit to govern themselves
- it suggested India was integral to the British economy and therefore independence may cause trade to suffer
Stanley Baldwin
- prime minister during the GoIA 1936
- suggested British empire was an organic organisation that had to evolve or die.
- fewer than 50 MPs supporting Churchill’s No campaign
the Government of India Act
- 1935
- British written constitution to be imposed in India
- a federation was proposed but never implemented. Only the clauses about provincial government were implemented.
- India would be divided into 11 provinces controlling everything bar defence and foreign affairs
- Burma shall no longer be a province (own gov)
- each province would have a governor appointed by his majesty with emergency powers (also protect minority interests and public service)
- a dyarchy (both appointed and elected officials) abolished
- two new states (Sindh and Orissa) created
- the viceroy would still be in control but should follow the advice of an Executive Committee (mainly Indians)
why did congress oppose the 1935 act?
- was not purna swaraj
- some provincial governments might end up as Muslim dominated. They did not support the reserving of seats for minority groups.
- different governors and therefore conditions would create inconsistency in their campaign
- afraid that splinter groups of congress supporters would use princely state agitation to build up a power base of their own and challenge the central congress leader
why did the muslim league oppose the 1935 act?
- it didn’t offer enough power to the muslims in central or provincial legislatures
- no guarantee to protect their rights
why did the princes oppose the 1935 act?
- led to a loss of power from princes. there were fears that they would join with tory imperialists like Churchill to prevent complete implementation of the act
- they also faced problems from their own subjects as there was increasingly pressure to reform before any fed agreement was reached and confirmed the autocracy of the princes
- unrest and violence broke out in some states (e.g. Hyderabad)
dilemma of the 1936 election
- both congress and Muslim league
- not participating would show they rejected the 1935 act
- but if the elections went ahead regardless then they could miss out on representation
- both therefore took part