Jump to content

Simon Commission

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

TheIndian Statutory Commission,also known as the simon commission, was a group of seven members of the British Parliament under the chairmanship of Sir John Simon. The commission arrived in the Indian subcontinent in 1928[1]to study constitutional reform in British India. One of its members was Clement Attlee, who would later become the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (1945 - 1951).

Background[edit]

The commission was constituted because at the time of introducing theMontagu–Chelmsford Reformsin 1919, theBritish Governmenthad declared that a commission would be sent to India after ten years to examine the effects and operations of the constitutional reforms and to suggest further reforms.[2]

In November 1927, the British government appointed the Simon Commission two years ahead of schedule. The commission was strongly opposed by theMuslim Leagueand theIndian National Congress,and prominent Indian leaders includingNehru,Gandhi,andJinnah,because it contained only British members and no Indians. However, it was supported byDr. B. R. Ambedkar,Periyar E. V. Ramasamyand Chaudhary Chhotu Ram.[3]

Prominent Indian nationalistLala Lajpat Railed a protest against the commission inLahore.He suffered a brutal police beating during the protest and died of his injuries eighteen days later on 17 November 1928.

TheGovernment of India Act 1919had introduced the system ofdiarchyto govern the provinces ofBritish India.Indian opinion clamored for revision of this form of government, and the Government of India Act 1919 stated that a commission would be appointed after ten years to investigate the progress of the government scheme and suggest new steps for reform. TheSecretary of State for IndiaF.E Smithfeared that the rulingConservativegovernment was facing imminent electoral defeat at the hands of theLabour Party,and hence feared that the commission would be filled by its members and sympathizers. Hence, the commission was appointed ahead of time, and seven MPs were selected to constitute the promised commission to examine the state of Indian constitutional affairs. He also ensured that there were no Indians in the commission, as he believed the Labour MPs and Indian members would join. TheViceroy of IndiaLord Irwintoo supported the decision to exclude Indians as he too thought they would vote together with the Labour MPs but also because he thought the Indian representatives would fight each other.[4]

Some people in India were outraged and insulted that the Simon Commission, which was to determine the future of India, did not include a single Indian member. TheIndian National Congress,at its December 1927 meeting inMadras(nowChennai), resolved to boycott the Commission and challengedLord Birkenhead,theSecretary of State for India,to draft a constitution that would be acceptable to the Indian populace. A faction of theMuslim League,led byMohammed Ali Jinnah,also decided to boycott the commission.

In face of the opposition from the Congress,F.E Smithwanted to publicize the meetings of the commission with "representative Moslems" in order to "terrify the immense Hindu population by apprehension that the Commission is being got hold of by the Moslems and may present a report altogether destructive of the Hindu population."[4]

However opinion was divided, with support for co-operation coming from some members of the Muslim League and also bothHindu Mahasabhaand members of theCentral Sikh League.[5]An All-India Committee for Cooperation with the Simon Commission was established by the Council of India and by selection of the Viceroy,Lord Irwin.The members of the committee were:C. Sankaran Nair(chairman),Arthur Froom,Nawab Ali Khan, Shivdev Singh Uberoi, Zulfiqar Ali Khan,Hari Singh Gour,Abdullah Al-Mamun Suhrawardy,Kikabhai Premchand and Prof.M. C. Rajah.

InBurma(Now known as Myanmar), which was included in the terms of reference of the Simon Commission, there was strong suspicion either that Burma's unpopular union with India would continue, or that the constitution recommended for Burma by the commission would be less generous than that chosen for India; these suspicions resulted in tension and violence in Burma leading to the rebellion ofSaya San.[6]

The commission found that the education was being denied to the untouchables who were ill-treated in the name of caste.

Protests and death of Lala Lajpat Rai[edit]

The Simon Commission left England in January 1928. Almost immediately with Its arrival inBombayon 3 February 1928, its members were confronted by throngs of protesters, although there were also some supporters among the crowds who saw it as the next step on the road to self-governance.[7]A strike began and many people turned out to greet the commission with black flags on which was written 'Simon Go Back'.Maghfoor Ahmad Ajaziled the demonstrations against Simon Commission inPatna.[8]Similar protests occurred in every major Indian city that the seven British MPs visited.[9]

One protest against the Simon Commission became infamous. On 30 October 1928, the Commission arrived atLahorewhere it was met by protesters waving black flags.[5]The protest was led by the Indian nationalistLala Lajpat Rai,who had moved a resolution against the Commission in the Legislative Assembly ofPunjabin February 1928. The protesters blocked the road in order to prevent the commission members from leaving the railway station. In order to make way for the commission, the local police led by Superintendent James Scott began beating protesters. Lala Lajpat Rai was critically injured and died on 17 November 1928 due to the head injuries he had sustained.[9]

Recommendations[edit]

The Commission published its 2-volume report in May 1930. The commission proposed to abolish the diarchy, an extension to autonomy of provinces by establishing representative government in provinces. However it allowed the British governors of provinces to retain much of their emergency powers, hence in practice very little autonomy was to be given to the provinces. Most notably the commission's report did not mention dominion status at all.[4]The commission also recommended to retain separate electorates as long as inter-communal tensions between Hindus and Muslims remained.[10]

Aftermath[edit]

In September 1928, ahead of the commission's release,Motilal Nehrupresented hisNehru Reportto counter its charges that Indians could not find a constitutional consensus among themselves. This report advocated that India be given dominion status with complete internal self-government. Jinnahdeclared the report as "Hindu Document" and presentedFourteen Points of Jinnahin response to the Nehru Report. The Fourteen Points consisted of Muslim's minimum demands from the British Rule.

By the time it was published the commission was already overshadowed by a declaration by the Viceroy of IndiaLord Irwinon 31 October 1929 which reinterpreted the 1917 declaration (which had led to theMortagu-Chelmsford reforms) as the British government's final policy goal always being India's attainment ofdominionstatus. He also called for around-table conferencein London regarding this. Although this remained controversial among many conservatives in London, in reality there was no change in British policy as the promise was very vague and far in the future.[11]

The outcome of the Simon Commission was theGovernment of India Act 1935,which called for a "responsible" government at the provincial level in India but not at the national level—that is a government responsible to the Indian community rather than London. It is the basis of many parts of theIndian Constitution.In 1937 the first elections were held in the Provinces, resulting in Congress Governments being returned in almost all Provinces.[12]

Clement Attlee was deeply moved by his experience on the commission and endorsed the final report. However, by 1933 he argued that British rule was alien to India and was unable to make the social and economic reforms necessary for India's progress. He became the British leader most sympathetic to Indian independence (as a dominion), preparing him for his role in deciding on Indian independence as British Prime Minister in 1947.[13][14]

Members of the Commission[edit]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^"Simon Report | Making Britain".
  2. ^C.F. Andrews (2017).India and the Simon Report.Routledge reprint of 1930 first edition. p. 11.ISBN9781315444987.
  3. ^"Dr. Ambedkar and Simon Commission – Evidence of Dr. Ambedkar before the Indian Statutory Commission - Velivada - Educate, Agitate, Organize".3 September 2019.
  4. ^abcReid, Walter (2016).Keeping the jewel in the crown: the British betrayal of India.Edinburgh. pp. Chapter 11.ISBN978-0-85790-900-8.OCLC949753978.{{cite book}}:CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  5. ^abNair, Neeti (May 2009). "Bhagat Singh as 'Satyagrahi': The Limits to Non-violence in Late Colonial India".Modern Asian Studies.43(3): 649–681.doi:10.1017/s0026749x08003491.JSTOR20488099.S2CID143725577.
  6. ^See e.g.Maurice Collis,Trials in Burma(London, 1938).
  7. ^venjaramood, suraj (2011).The Rediscovery of India.Penguin the UK. p. 210.ISBN978-8-18475-566-4.
  8. ^Nehru Memorial Museum and Library (2003).NMML Manuscripts: An Introduction.Nehru Memorial Museum and Library. p. 120.ISBN9788187614050.
  9. ^abAhmed, Ishtiaq (2020).Jinnah: his successes, failures and role in history.Gurgaon. pp. Chapter 5.ISBN978-0-670-09052-5.OCLC1257031805.{{cite book}}:CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  10. ^Ahmed, Ishtiaq (2020).Jinnah: his successes, failures and role in history.Penguin Random House India. pp. Chapter 6.ISBN978-0-670-09052-5.OCLC1257031805.
  11. ^Reid, Walter (2016).Keeping the jewel in the crown: the British betrayal of India.Edinburgh. pp. Chapter 13.ISBN978-0-85790-900-8.OCLC949753978.{{cite book}}:CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
  12. ^Pew Ghosh (2012).Indian Government and Politics.PHI Learning. pp. 20–21.ISBN9788120346499.
  13. ^Brasted Howard, Bridge Carl (1988). "The British Labour Party and Indian Nationalism, 1907‐1947".South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies.11(2): 69–99.doi:10.1080/00856408808723113.
  14. ^R.J. Moore,Escape from Empire: The Attlee Government & the Indian Problem(1983).

Further reading[edit]

External links[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Simon_Commission&oldid=1235097766"