HISTORY II

I INTERNAL EVALUATION: An Analysis on The

Government of India Act, 1919
Dr. Shambhulinganand S.Shireshi.

SUBMITTED BY: -
AARYA CHHANGANI
385
BA LLB (Hons.)
Division ‘D’
18010125385
 “AN ANALYSIS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT 1919”

INTRODUCTION

In the year 1600 the British came to India through the East India Company for the trade. Bu1 over the years
through means of other charters and acts the British acquired the Indian territories. In the year of 1858 August,
The Government of India Act was passed by the British Parliament to set an end to the East India Company
rule which is famously called as Queen Victoria Proclamation. The control of British Government of India
was transferred to the British crown rather than the east India company. The British Governor General of India
was given the title Viceroy of India which means the representative of the Monarch. The people of India were
granted their rights by Queen Victoria under this act of the British parliament. 2

Due to the outbreak of the First World War and the contributions made by the Indians to it and the pressure
generated by the Home Rule Movement and the Revolutionary Movement the Indians had to be given more
rights in the form of diarchy that is government by two independent authorities. It has already been narrated
that the act of 1909 did not generate the principal of responsible Government in India. The central control
over the provinces preserved to be as tight and stifling as ever before. The government did not surrender its
arbitrary powers with the legislature. The reforms were not only shadowy but also undoubtedly vicious.

On the 20th August 1917, the British Government made a pronouncement that its policy vis-à-vis India was
“that of increasing association of Indians in every branch of administration, and the gradual development of
self governing institutions, with a view to the progressive realization of responsible government in India as an
integral part of the British Empire.” Edwin Samuel Montagu had remained the Secretary of State for India
between 1917 and 1922. He was a critic of the whole framework by which India was regulated. he made a
historic declaration in the House of Commons in British Parliament which is called “Montague declaration”.
The theme of this declaration was increasing association of Indians in every branch of administration and
gradual development of self governing institutions and responsible government in India.

1
Puja Mondal, Montagu Chelmsford reforms and Government of India Act 1919,
http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/history/montagu-chelmsford-reforms-and-government-of-india-act-1919/23357
2
Ugarthi Shankalia, Government of India Acts and its adoption and impacts in the constitution and post independence,
http://www.acadpubl.eu/hub/ Special Issue
MAIN PROVISONS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT 1919

1. Preamble
Within six months of Montagu’s arrival in India, he consulted with the viceroy, Mr. Chelmsford and
formulated his proposal to make a committee of 4 members. He made a bill to be passed in the British
parliament which received royal assent on 23rd December 1919.The government of India act 1919 had
its own preamble. The key points of the preamble were:
 India will be remaining as an integral part of the British empire.
 The time and manner for the goal of responsible government will be decided not by the Indian
but by the British Parliament which was an outside authority.
 There will be gradual decentralization of authority without loosening the central government.
Therefore, the preamble of the Government of India act 1919 suggested for a decentralized
unitary form of government in India.
 The character of central government remained unchanged although there was partial
responsibility in the government.
 The government of India was to remain responsible to the British Parliament but in order to
seek co-operation of the people, size of the Central legislature was to be enlarged.

2. Home Government

The government of India act 1919 did not make any significant change in the functions of secretary of
state in India. The secretary of state acted as the agent of the British Government to direct and control
all acts related to the revenues of India or the Government. Theoretically the Secretary of the state of
India continued to be the supreme head of the British administration of India and the Governor-
General and Governors had to pay due respect to the Secretary of the state. Before the enactment of
the Government of India act 1919, the Secretary of the state was paid his salary out of Indian revenues.
But after the act his salary was made a charge of British revenues.

3. Introduction of Dyarchy

Dyarchy also spelled as diarchy is a system of double government introduced by the Government of
India Act 1919 for the provinces of the British India. It marked the first introduction of the democratic
principle into executive branch of the British administration of India.
 Though the act was much criticized it signified a breakthrough in British Indian government and was
the forerunner of India’s full provincial autonomy in 1935 and Independence in 1947. 3

In government of India Act 1919 the spheres of the central and provincial governments were
demarcated by a division of “central” and “provincial”. The central subjects included all subjects
directly administered by the government of India or in which extra- provincial interest were dominant.
The provincial subjects in which the interests of the provinces essentially predominated.

Dyarchy was introduced by the Secretary of the State at that time Mr. Edwin Samuel Montagu and the
then Viceroy of India Lord Chelmsford. Dyarchy meant division of the executive branch of each
provincial government into authoritarian and popularly responsible sections. The first section was
composed of executive councilors appointed by the crown. The second section was composed of the
ministers who were selected by the governor from the elected members of provincial legislature who
were Indians.

The subjects of administration were divided between the councilors and the ministers which were
named reserved and transferred subjects, respectively. The reserved subjects came under the heading
under heading of law and order and included justice, land revenue, police, irrigation. The transferred
subjects included the local self government, public health, education, public works and agriculture,
fisheries, forests.

Dyarchy was a gradual transformation from irresponsible to responsible government. The provinces
were thought to be suitable for experimenting with such scheme. The elements of responsibility were
as follows: The members in control of the reserved subjects were made responsible to British
parliament through secretary of state.

The ministers who controlled the transferred subjects were made responsible through the legislative
councils to an Indian electorate. Basically the subjects which were considered to be important for the
welfare of the masses and maintaining peace and order in the state were classified as reserved and the
subjects in which there was more local interest were classified as transferred.

3
The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannia, Dyarchy, https://www.britannica.com/topic/dyarchy
4. Responsive Autocracy at the center

The authors of the Montagu-Chelmsford Report were of the opinion that Dyrachy should not be
introduced at the Centre and there should be responsible autocracy at the Centre. The Dyarchy was
introduced only in the Provinces. The Government of India remained responsible to the Secretary of
State for India and the British Parliament.

The changes introduced by the Government of India Act, 1919 at the Centre were unimportant. The
Act of 1919 did not introduce any fundamental change in composition and powers of the Central
Executive Council. The powers of the Government-General were left untouched. The Central
Legislature got no effective control over him. As earlier the superintendence and control of the entire
administration including both civil and military remained vested with him. Although he was required
to take all decisions in his Executive Council.

In a way he constituted the whole of the Executive. His dominating position in the Council was due to
various reasons. And he also had a powerful say in the appointment and promotion of his Councillors.
The work distribution among and making up of rules and regulations for his councilors was also done
by him. Above all he was not bound to act on the advice of his Council.

The most responsible and distinguished office was held by Governor-General of India. He was
appointed by the Crown on the recommendation of the British Prime Minister for a period of 5 years.
He discharged his onerous duties with the help of his Executive and Legislative Councils. Since he
was individually responsible to British Parliament for the good governance of India, he was armed
with extensive discretionary powers. He was also provided with a well furnished and free Government
House to live in. The new Act empowered the Governor-General to have direct control and later he
exercised his power of supervision and control over the Indian States.

He was called Viceroy when he had his dealings with his native States on behalf of the Crown. The
step was meant to give effect to the policy of increasing association of Indians in every branch of
administration. But it did not inspire much confidence amongst the people because of two reasons.
The first was that only relatively unimportant departments were entrusted to Indian Councillors and
secondly, the Executive remained as usual free from the inquest and control of the Legislature. Since
the Councillors knew that the Legislature could not remove them even by a vote of censure, they did
not even care for the interests of the people at large.
 5. Special powers of Governor – General

It should be noted that The Government of India Act 1919 had no intentions to make the legislature
totally in favor of the Indians. The powers of the legislature were quite limited and the composition
was with a lot of flaws. The Governor – General summoned and prorogued the legislature and even
dissolved the legislature assembly. He also had the power to reject the bill so in all his opinion could
decide the fate of the country.

The Central Legislature was not a sovereign law-making body. At every step it was subject to the
overriding authority of the Governor-General who constituted the real ruler of the land. The Governor-
General was also empowered to promulgate ordinances in case of emergency while the Legislature
was not in session. The life of such an ordinance was normally six months unless extended for six
months again. In all the situations the real ruler was the Governor- General of India.

According to Sir Malcolm Haily, f India became responsible if not responsive to public opinion; its
actions became indicative if not reflective of the popular viewpoint.”4

6. Powers of the Assembly and Council

The Legislative Assembly and Council of State enjoyed similar and concurrent powers except in
matters of finance. A bill needed to be passed on both the houses before becoming a law. The budget
was presented in both the houses in same day, however, all other money bills were first introduced in
lower house and then in the upper house. The assembly could only make amendments which were also
not acceptable until the governor general certified it.

7. Elections and Franchise

Under the Government of India Act 1919 the franchise was not flexible. It was restricted. There was
no universal franchise, no adult suffrage and no voting powers for women. The qualifications of voting
were as follows:

 They should have a property with rental value, taxable income or paid land revenue of at least
Rs. 3000 in a year.

4
Nagamma G. Ningade, Government of India Act 1919,
http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/174777/9/09_chapter%203.pdf
  They must have past experience in the legislative council.
 They must have membership of university senate.
 They should hold certain offices in local bodies.
 They should have some specified titles.
The above qualifications mentioned in The Government of India Act 1919 were so much
restrictive that there were only 1700 voters for election of 33 members. 5

ANALYSIS OF THE SUBJECT

The Government of India Act 1919 provided for partial transfer of power to the electorate through the system
dyarchy.

Major Drawbacks of the act

The act did not prescribe the franchise properly. The qualifications of the Government of India Act 1919 were
restrictive. Women could not vote and also the right to vote was judged by the amount of landed property one
person had. The method of election and the constitution of constituencies were to be provided for by the rules
made under the Act. The vast majority of the elected members of the new legislative councils were therefore
representatives of territorial or geographical area.

However, there were a few non – territorial constituencies. The centre, the legislature had no control over the
governor-general and his executive council. Division of subjects was not satisfactory at the centre.

At the level of provinces, division of subjects and parallel administration of two parts was irrational and hence
unworkable. The provincial ministers had no control over finances and over the bureaucrats, leading to
constant friction between the two. Ministers were often not consulted on important matters too; in fact, they
could be overruled by the governor on any matter that the latter considered special.

The principal of the communal representation, which was accepted under the Morley- Minto scheme of
reform, was not only retained, but even extended in its application. In every council there were a large number
of Mohammedan members who were elected by Mohammedans. There was also a small number of seats for
Europeans in the council.6

5
Government of India Act,1919, October 22, 2011, https://www.gktoday.in/gk/government-of-india-act-1919/

6
Seventh Edition, M P Jain, Indian Legal And Constitutional History, pg 565
Another feature of the new reforms was a very considerable increase in the number of the electors. The scheme
of franchise was based generally upon the principle of residence within the constituency and possession of
some property qualifications as evidenced by payment of land revenue local, municipal and urban rates in the
specified areas and also the income tax. The standard normally varied from one council to another.

Merits of the act

Despite a lot of limitation in the Government of India Act of 1919 there were a few merits also. The
Government of India act 1919 which is known as Montague-Chelmsford reforms and this Act made an
introduction to bicameral legislature at the centre. The act has made changes in the regional government also.
This act sought to fulfil its promises by emphasizing greater autonomy of provinces and by making changes
to the constitution. Government of India Acts made in British Rule sought to establish by a somewhat novel
process and that process consisting of somewhat autonomous British India provinces.

It was the Act of 1919 where the masses of India came into close contact with the administration of the
country and also got an insight of how everything works. The Government of India Act marked the end of the
policy of marked benevolent despotism and thus began the genesis of the responsible government in India. It
was for the first time, that elections to the legislatures were known to the people and this created political
consciousness among the masses.

However, hose people who had a property, taxable income & paid land revenue of Rs. 3000 were entitled to
vote. The number of the Indian in the was raised to 3 in the Governor General in Council of 8. These Indian
members were entrusted to some portfolios such as labor, health and industry.

This was also the first time that a number of Indian women got the right to franchise for the first time. The
subjects of national importance such as foreign affairs, defence, political relations, posts and telegraph, public
departments, communication etc. are included in the central list while others like public health, native self
government, education, land revenue, famine, law and order were enclosed within the provincial list.

CONCLUSION

The reforms of the Government of India Act 1919 could not satisfy the masses of India but they were not
devoid of the utility. The Government of India Act 1919 is truly considered as a great landmark in the
constitutional history of India. This act marked the end of benevolent despotism.
In the words of Coup-land, "The Act crossed the line between legislative and executive authority. Previous
measures had enabled Indians increasingly to control their legislatures but not their governments. Some
Indians, it is true, had been members of those governments, but they had been officially appointed and were
responsible like their British colleagues to the Secretary of State and Parliament. Now Indians were to govern,
so to speak, on their own. They were to take charge of great departments of provincial administration, not as
official nominees but as the leaders of the elected majorities in their legislatures and responsible to them." 7

There was a radical change in the concept of Provincial government by the introduction of dyarchy. Despite
a need for large qualifications for voting, a large number of people could vote and it helped people to equip
themselves with political education. There was enlargement of the size and democratic nature of the
Legislative Councils, they could make their own laws which were although subject to the ratification of the
governor. And there was also Indianisation in the government services.

The recruitment of non-Indian civil servants in the transferred subjects gradually came to an end. The work
of the reformed Central Legislature was commendable. Although the Executive was not solely responsible
but it had a large number of power in influencing it.

On the point of Home Government, the Government of India Act 1919 made an important change the secretary
of state as henceforth to be paid out of the British exchequer.

Thus we can safely conclude that with all the criticism leveled against the Reforms Act of 1919, it was an Act
of great administrative and constitutional importance.

7
B. Coupland: India A Restatement, p.113.