The Morley-Minto Reforms of 1909 introduced separate electorates for Muslims and expanded legislative councils in India. While aimed at addressing political demands, these reforms were criticized for failing to provide genuine self-government and creating divisions within Indian society. The reforms are seen as a strategy to prevent nationalist unity rather than a step toward meaningful political progress.
Initial Demands: In October 1906, a group of Muslim elites called the Simla Deputation, led by the Agha Khan, met Lord Minto and demanded separate electorates for Muslims and representation in excess of their numerical strength due to their contribution to the defense of the empire. This group quickly took over the Muslim League, initially founded by Nawab Salimullah of Dacca along with Nawabs Mohsin-ul-Mulk and Waqar-ul-Mulk in December 1906. The Muslim League aimed to preach loyalty to the empire and distance the Muslim intelligentsia from the Congress.
Gokhale’s Mission: Gopal Krishna Gokhale traveled to England to meet Secretary of State for India, John Morley, to present Congress's demands for a self-governing system similar to that in other British colonies.
The Reforms:
Elective Principle: Recognized for non-official membership of councils in India, allowing Indians to participate in elections based on class and community.
Separate Electorates: Established separate electorates for Muslims for the central council, a significant and controversial step for India.
Increased Membership: The number of elected members in the Imperial Legislative Council and Provincial Legislative Councils was increased. Provincial councils had a non-official majority, though the overall non-elected majority remained.
Representation Details: In the Imperial Legislative Council, out of 69 members, 37 were officials and 32 were non-officials. Of the 27 elected non-officials, 8 seats were reserved for Muslims under separate electorates (only Muslims could vote for Muslim candidates), 4 for British capitalists, 2 for landlords, and 13 for the general electorate.
Indirect Election: Elected members were chosen indirectly through an electoral college formed by local bodies, which elected members of provincial legislatures, who then elected members of the central legislature.
Income Qualification: Lower income qualification for Muslim voters compared to Hindus.
Legislative Powers: Enlarged powers for legislatures at both the center and provinces, including the ability to pass resolutions, ask questions, and vote on separate items in the budget. However, the budget as a whole could not be voted upon.
Indian Representation: One Indian was to be appointed to the viceroy’s executive council (Satyendra Sinha was the first in 1909).
Evaluation: The 1909 reforms did not address the Indian political problem effectively. Lord Morley made it clear that colonial self-government was unsuitable for India and was opposed to parliamentary or responsible government. The reforms were seen as a means to divide nationalist ranks and prevent unity through separate electorates. They were viewed as 'benevolent despotism' rather than genuine self-government.
Criticisms:
Lord Morley: "Reforms may not save the Raj, but if they don’t, nothing else will." The reforms failed to resolve Indian issues effectively.
Montford Report: The reforms created a political barrier isolating Muslims from the rest of India and reversed the unifying process that had been ongoing for centuries. The barrier, initially small, grew with franchise extensions and affected the entire political and social structure.
Jawaharlal Nehru: Criticized the system as too indirect, giving the impression of "infiltration of legislators through a number of sieves," and failing to provide real representation or responsibility.
We use cookies to improve your experience on our website. By continuing to browse, you agree to our use of cookies. Please review our
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Use for more information.
