The Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms, embodied in the Government of India Act of 1919, were introduced as a result of the August Declaration of 1917, which promised gradual development of self-governing institutions in India. However, while the reforms introduced some new features in governance, they disappointed Indian nationalists who expected much more after their support to Britain during the First World War.
Background
-
August Declaration (1917) by Edwin Montagu promised progressive self-government.
-
Indian leaders supported the British war effort, expecting real political concessions.
-
Rising political consciousness through the Home Rule Movement and Lucknow Pact pressured the British.
-
The reforms were worked out jointly by Montagu (Secretary of State for India) and Lord Chelmsford (Viceroy of India).
Key Features of the Act (1919)
-
Dyarchy in Provinces:
-
Introduced a system of dual government at the provincial level.
-
Subjects were divided into:
-
Transferred subjects: controlled by Indian ministers (education, health, local self-government, agriculture).
-
Reserved subjects: retained by British officials (law and order, finance, revenue, police).
-
-
The Governor had overriding powers.
-
-
Legislative Councils Expanded:
-
Central Legislature became bicameral for the first time:
-
Council of State (Upper House).
-
Legislative Assembly (Lower House).
-
-
Provincial Legislative Councils were enlarged with more elected Indian members.
-
-
Separate Electorates Extended:
-
Continued separate electorates for Muslims.
-
Introduced separate representation for Sikhs, Indian Christians, Anglo-Indians, and Europeans.
-
-
Limited Franchise:
-
Voting rights were given only to about 10% of the population, based on property, income, and education.
-
-
Central Government:
-
Remained under the control of the Viceroy and Executive Council, with no real transfer of power to Indians.
-
Significance
-
First attempt to introduce self-government in provinces through dyarchy.
-
Indians were given greater representation in legislatures.
-
Marked the beginning of bicameralism at the Centre.
Limitations
-
Dyarchy was confusing and unworkable, as real power remained with British officials.
-
The Viceroy and Governors retained veto powers.
-
Separate electorates further deepened communal divisions.
-
The reforms failed to satisfy Indian aspirations for full self-rule.
Reaction in India
-
Congress leaders criticized the reforms as inadequate and deceptive.
-
Extremists and revolutionaries dismissed them as worthless.
-
This disappointment led to the rise of mass movements under Gandhi, beginning with the Rowlatt Satyagraha (1919) and the Non-Cooperation Movement (1920).
Key Takeaway
The Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms (1919) were a limited experiment in provincial self-government, but they failed to meet Indian aspirations. By retaining British control and promoting communal divisions, the Act deepened nationalist dissatisfaction and paved the way for mass agitations in the 1920s.