[SIR

UMAR KHAN DAWAR (0325-2512225)] 1

Minto-Morley Reforms 1909

• The Central legislative Council membership to be increased to 60.

• Provincial legislative council membership
o For major provinces – 50
o For smaller provinces – 30
• Legislative councils to have authority to suggest laws (advisory power)
• Muslims got reserved seats in the councils
• Muslims also got the right of separate electorates
• At the center, official members were to form majority but in provinces, non-official members were to be in
majority
•

Q) Why did INC oppose the reforms of 1909?

Ø Few points of the reforms to be explained

Ø INC had demanded self-governance in 1906. It wasn’t granted in 1909 reforms, which disappointed INC
Ø INC stood for introduction of democracy. It opposed separate electorate and reserved seats for Muslims,
being against democracy
Ø INC also objected to the extent of representation for Indians in the councils as being far less
Ø INC criticized these reforms as the councils had only advisory powers and the real powers rested with the
viceroy
Ø Only few Indians could vote due to property qualification

Lucknow Pact 1916

• There shall be self-governance in India

• There shall be separate electorate for all communities if they wish for it
rd
• Muslims to have 1/3 seats in the center
• Central legislative council membership to be increased to 150
• Half of the members of the central legislative council should be Indians
• Weightage system to be adopted
th
• No law to be passed by any legislature if 3/4 members of any community oppose it

Q) Why was Lucknow Pact signed in 1916?

Ø Few points of the pact to be mentioned

Ø In 1913, ML added “self-rule” to its goals. Self-rule had already been asked by INC earlier. As both parties
shared the similar aim of self-governance, this brought ML and INC closer to each other.
Ø Jinnah in 1913 joined ML. He was already a member of INC. he was respected in both political parties
and thus, he played a role to bring ML and INC closer to each other to achieve his ideal of Hindu-Muslim
unity
Ø Both ML and INC had grievances against the British
o INC was angry as self-governance was not granted
o ML was offended by a number of events:
§ 1911 - reversal of partition of Bengal
§ 1913 – Kanpur mosque massacre
§ British refusal to a Muslim university
§ British anti-Turkish policies
 2 [SIR UMAR KHAN DAWAR (0325-2512225)]

Montague-Chelmsford Reforms 1919

• A bicameral legislature introduced at the center

• Council of State – Upper house (to have 60 members)
• Legislative assembly – Lower house (to have 144 members)
• There were more elected members than the appointed members in the councils
• The viceroy could still refuse any law
• Provincial legislative councils were to be unicameral
• Dyarchy was introduced in the provinces
o It divided the provincial departments into two categories
o Reserved subjects – were under the British control e.g. law and order, justice, finance etc.
o Transfer subjects – were handed over to the Indian ministers e.g. health, education
o It wasn’t a satisfactory system as it lacked coordination between different departments
• Only 2% of Indians could vote

Q) Why were the 1919 reforms opposed by the Indians?

Ø Few points of the reforms

Ø Indians had helped British fight WWI, and expected in return to be granted self-governance. Self-
governance, however, was not granted
Ø Viceroy could still make or unmake laws
Ø INC opposed extension of separate electorates to other minorities as it thought it would divide India
further
Ø Dyarchy was not a satisfactory system
Ø Governors in the provinces could dismiss the entire administration
Ø Only 2% of Indians could vote due to property qualification

Government of India Act 1935

• A bicameral legislature to be at the center

• Council of state – Upper house (having 260 members)
• Legislative assembly – Lower house (having 375 members)
• Dyarchy was abolished in the provinces and introduced at the center
rd
• Muslims got 1/3 seats in the center
• Separate electorate provided for
• Sindh separated from Bombay and made a province
• NWFP also got provincial status
• Orissa, another province set up
• Viceroy to approve all laws
• Governors in provinces given special powers to intervene if law and order threatened
• Parliamentary system established in provinces
• Only 25% of Indians could vote
 [SIR UMAR KHAN DAWAR (0325-2512225)] 3

Q) Why was there so much Indian opposition against the Govt. of India Act 1935?

Ø Few points of the Act to be mentioned

Ø The long-standing Indian demand of self-governance was not met, thus Indians were disappointed with
this Act
Ø Viceroy still could approve laws so had much powers
Ø INC opposed separate electorates
Ø Dyarchy was a bad/unsatisfactory system
Ø Governors’ powers in provinces to intervene if law and order was threatened, were unacceptable
Ø Only 25% Indians could vote due to property qualification

Q) Why was Govt. of India Act so important to the future of Indian Sub-Continent?

Ø Few points of the Act to be mentioned

Ø It was the last major Act introduced by the British before partition
Ø New provinces were formed e.g. Sindh, NWFP etc.
Ø For the first time, representative governments were formed in provinces under 1935 Act, when elections
in provinces were held in 1937
Ø Indians had their first parliamentary experience under the Govt. of India Act 1935
Ø More Indians to get the right to vote