How Effective Were the Morely-Minto Reforms?

"Politics is a field where the choice lies constantly between two blunders." So said John Morely, the secretary of state for India, and indeed, that is the question. Were the Morely-Minto Reforms, instituted in 1909 by John Morley and Lord Minto Viceroy of India, effective, or were they a blunder? There was no doubt in the pairs mind about Lord Curzon's, Minto's predecessor, greatest blunder. Lord Curzon's failed reforms in Bengal were one of the main points of the Reforms. The partition of Bengal had been a disaster for the British Raj; the backlash was not contained solely to Bengal, Lord Minto had actually inherited quite a volatile situation in India from Curzon. This was not just political unrest, but there was also some lingering violence.

Minto, being the embodiment and symbol of British rule, was a target. Towards the end of 1906 in the Punjab there was the worst unrest seen for a generation. This was unrest on the scale of the great mutiny of 1857. The most senior figure in the Punjab was one Lieutenant-Governor Ibbetson. Ibbetson faced losing control of this volatile province, not solely due to the grievances with which the Indians had against a particular policy but a deeper hate of British rule. He also feared that the Punjabi elements of the army would become unreliable. However, his fears were misplaced t a degree. Back in London, Morley was not quite as anxious as Ibbetson, and was closer to Minto's views. There was an inquiry into the events that took place in the Punjab. This inquiry concluded that agitators had influenced the unrest amongst the Punjabi soldiers and that many Indians had taken such an opportunity to raise other grievances that they had, such as pay and promotion. The report summarised that the Punjabi region of India was not actually on the point of mutiny, as Ibbetson had feared.

When Ibbetson left the Punjab for medical reasons, Minto took the opportunity to intervene and withdrew some of the proposals that were drawn up during the Ibbetson administration, the more unpopular policies were withdrawn. The abandonment of the more unpopular policies was met with relief and joy. People poured onto the streets celebrating the good news, and showing their loyalty to the British Crown.

The unrest of Curzon's reforms sparked what was a to be a wake up call for the poor administration of Indians in the Raj. There was violence, but this wasn't on the same scale as half a century earlier. Instead, a political dimension was beginning to appear in the Raj.

Even in the Indian National Congress, opinion was beginning to polarise between the "moderates" and the more "extremist" elements of the group. Morely and Minto in London and India both became increasingly convinced of the fact that they would only be able to save the Raj from a progressive approach to governance. Indeed Morley said to Minto whilst discussing the reforms "Reforms may not save the Raj, but if they don't, nothing else will", this was the situation that the Raj was in. Reform had to happen. They couldn't afford to repeat the mistakes of George Nathaniel Curzon.

Morley wanted to dramatically increase the "Indianisation" of governance. But to remove large numbers of white administrators in the Raj would not only be controversial, it would be job threatening. The reforms were announced in 1908 and enshrined in law a year later. However, the Indian Councils act was a compromise between the Secretary of India and the Viceroy.

New constituencies instituted in these reforms were small, some just over twenty, and the total number of voted was only four thousand! It is clear at the end of the reforms that Morley had envisaged something more radical than that which Minto envisaged. The Viceroy wanted a modest increase in the number of Indians who would serve on the councils of the Raj, Morley was far more ambitious in his aims

The Morley-Minto reforms, or the Indian Councils Act 1909, was very much a product of Victorian liberalism. Most councils kept officials rather than elected members. These elected members would be chosen by organisations who recommended representatives to the council. Despite these being "recommendations" these were never rejected.

The effectiveness of the Morley-Minto reforms was quite pronounced; from an Indian perspective the reforms could begin the trend for progress and further involvement in the governance of the Raj. However, the vote was restricted to the rich Indians, the land owning minority. These reforms were also a reward for the anglophile Indians. Those who had moderate opinion and those who could be trusted by the British. However, there were many belonging to this elite ho were excluded.

Those who had political ideas and wanted to express them often couldn't , indeed it could be argued that those elements of Indian society were radicalised further as a result of being unable to voice their ideas. These Indians viewed the reforms as somewhat of a democratic façade. Any attempt at democratisation would be warmly welcomed by the beneficiaries of the action those who it passed by were not as pleased. Instead of satisfying the calls of reform from the Indian Intelligencia, it served only as a taste for what they really wanted.

Many British administrators didn't find the Morley-Minto Reforms as effective. Some were disillusioned as they felt that these reforms attacked their status. They felt undermined and feared for being in the minority. Some felt that the reforms were imposed from above without knowing the "real India".

However, these reforms were most definitely a cynosure for the Muslim league. Muhammad Ali Jinnah , became an elected representative and possessed optimism for the reforms. The Muslims had "special" privileges, and possessed more influence per capita than Hindus.

After the acts there was somewhat of a reversal, previously the Congress had publicly supported the reforms protested, whilst the Muslims, who were initially slightly hostile towards the plans, were satisfied with them. This was due to the fact that the regulations determining the groups eligible to elect representetives were published after the acts themselves. These gave the Muslims a special advantage.

The Indian national congress, which was the emerging vehicle for an Indian national consciousness felt cheated as they thought the Muslims wielded disproportionate power. These were the most fundamental changes to the governance of India since the post Mutiny nationalisation of India in 1857.

Before the administration of India was largely a white European preserve, while the British were still in control and in command the Indians now had legal influence. The balance of power had slightly shifted in favour of the Indians. In 1911, the ill-fated Bengali partition was reversed, this was announced by King George V in his coronation in Durbar.

Regarding the question of whether the Morley-Minto reforms were effective, I believe that they were necessary, but not effective. The reforms gave the Indians a taste of a form of democracy, but no real power. Indeed it became clear that Indian groups became in official oppositio ot the British Government. Lord Curzon voiced his opinion after the reforms that the increase in Indian intervention in the governance had actually reduced the overall care of the British élite.

The 'Durbar ' model of governance remained, but the nudge towards a legally enshrined legislative body was starting. 'Change' was the main driving force of the reforms , and change, albeit a little, had been made. Overall, opinion was divided in both British and Indian camps. On how effective the Morley-Minto Reforms were? I would have to concede that although they managed to address some of the problems which were plaguing the Indian consciousness since Lord Curzon's time as Viceroy, I don't think that the way that these were implemented was necessarily effective.

Essentially with the Morley-Minto reforms, the Hindus had been isolated to a degree. This was a bad move for the British Raj. Isolating the majority of the Indian populace is never a good idea. The reforms also were shown to have changed little in the way of decision making. Indeed by 1917, 168 resolutions had been made by the new imperial legislative council, eventually just twenty eight had been accepted.

Although the reforms had been an attempt to sate the appetite of the Indians who longed for political change, in truth, little difference was made in the realm of political satisfaction, for the Indians at least. Those who benefitted from the changes were pleased, whilst those who had been passed by, the majority, were disappointed. Overall I would judge the Morley-Minto reforms to be a step in the right direction, but certainly not effective legislative reform.

Bibliography

Barbara Daly Metcalf, Thomas Metcalf. A Concise History of Modern India.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Beloff, Max. "The British Empire." History Today, February 4, 1996.

Chhabra, G.S. Advanced Study in the History of Modern India: 1803-1920. Lotus Press, 1971.