Chapter-18
The Simon Commission (1927)
Arora IAS Class Notes
Background:
- The Government of India Act (1919) provided for a commission to review progress after 10 years.
Composition:
- Established in 1927 by the British government under Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin.
- All-white, seven-member commission chaired by Sir John Simon (with Clement Attlee as unofficial co-chair).
- Composed of four Conservatives, two Labourites, and one Liberal.
Purpose:
- To assess India’s readiness for further constitutional reforms.
- To recommend the direction of such reforms.
Motivations:
- Conservative government’s fear of losing power to Labour.
- Desire to control the issue of Indian reforms before a potential Labour government.
- Concerns about the perceived instability of the 1919 Act.
Context:
- Preceded by several inquiries into Indian governance:
- Lee Commission (1923) – Superior Civil Services.
- Muddiman Committee (1924) – Functioning of the 1919 Act Constitution.
- Linlithgow Commission (1926) – Agricultural and rural economy.
Controversial Aspect:
- Lack of Indian representation in the commission.
Indian Response to the Simon Commission (1927)
Rejection and Boycott:
- Reason for Anger:Exclusion of Indians from the commission, seen as disrespectful and undermining self-determination.
- Congress Response:
- Boycott at every stage (December 1927 session, Madras).
- Nehru’s resolution for complete independence as the goal.
- Other Groups:
- Hindu Mahasabha (liberals).
- Jinnah’s faction of Muslim League.
- Exceptions: Unionists (Punjab), Justice Party (South).
Public Protests:
- Nationwide Hartal (strike) and rallieson the commission’s arrival (February 3, 1928).
- “Simon Go Back”slogan popularized (possibly by Yusuf Meharally or Lala Lajpat Rai).
- Active participation of youth:
- New generation experiencing political action.
- Leadership roles for Nehru and Subhash Bose.
- Boost for youth leagues and conferences.
- Emergence of socialist groups.
- Police Repression:
- Lathicharges (police beatings) on demonstrators.
- Injuries to Jawaharlal Nehru and G.B. Pant.
- Fatal police beating of Lala Lajpat Rai (October 1928).
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s Position:
- Appointed by Bombay Legislative Council to work with the commission.
- Advocated for:
- Universal adult franchise (male and female).
- Provincial autonomy.
- Dyarchy at the Center.
- Presented demands for the Depressed Classes (Dalits):
- Separate identity from Hindus.
- Political safeguards due to social and economic disadvantages.
- Reserved seats in legislatures (if universal franchise granted).
- Separate electorate (if no universal franchise).
- Educational and service entry opportunities.
- Though the Simon Commission report offered reserved seats, Ambedkar disliked the conditional nature (governor’s approval needed).
Note: The Simon Commission report was ultimately not implemented.
Impact of the Simon Commission (1927)
Stimulus for Radical Forces:
- The national movement gained momentum.
- Congress, lacking an active program, found a cause for mass action.
- Demands shifted towards:
- Complete independence.
- Socialist-style socio-economic reforms.
Prospects for Unity:
- Lord Birkenhead challenged Indians to propose a unified constitution.
- This challenge offered a potential path towards Indian unity.
Simon Commission Recommendations (May 1930):
- Abolition of dyarchy in provinces.
- Representative governments with autonomy in provinces.
- Governor’s discretionary power for security and community protection.
- Increased provincial legislative council members.
- No parliamentary responsibility at the center.
- Governor-General to appoint cabinet members.
- Retention and potential expansion of separate communal electorates.
- No universal franchise.
- Eventual federalism with a “Consultative Council of Greater India.”
- Local legislatures for North-West Frontier Province and Baluchistan.
- Separate provinces for Sindh and Burma.
- Indianization of the army (gradual).
Note: These recommendations became largely irrelevant due to subsequent events.
The Nehru Report (1928)
Background:
- Drafted in response to Lord Birkenhead’s challenge for a unified Indian constitution.
- Compiled by a committee under Motilal Nehru (February 1928).
- First major attempt by Indians to propose a constitutional framework.
Committee Members:
- Motilal Nehru (Chair)
- Tej Bahadur Sapru
- Subhas Chandra Bose
- S. Aney
- Mangal Singh
- Ali Imam
- Shuaib Qureshi
- R. Pradhan
Key Recommendations:
- Dominion Status:Majority favored dominion status (similar to self-governing colonies) as the initial goal (opposed by some who wanted complete independence).
- Joint Electorates:Replacement of separate electorates with reservation of seats for Muslims in minority provinces.
- Linguistic Provinces:Creation of provinces based on language.
- Fundamental Rights:Included 19 rights, such as equal rights for women, freedom of association, and universal adult suffrage.
- Responsible Government:
- Central Parliament with a House of Representatives (elected) and a Senate (elected by provincial councils).
- Governor-General appointed by Britain but advised by a responsible central executive council.
- Provincial councils with responsible executives.
- Secular State:Complete dissociation of state from religion.
Communal Considerations:
- Muslim League Demands (Delhi Proposals, 1927):
- Joint electorates with reserved seats for Muslims.
- One-third representation for Muslims in the central legislature.
- Proportional representation in Punjab and Bengal.
- Three new Muslim-majority provinces (Sindh, Baluchistan, North-West Frontier Province).
- Hindu Mahasabha Concerns:
- Opposed new Muslim-majority provinces and Muslim reservation in Punjab and Bengal.
- Favored a unitary structure.
- Nehru Report Compromises:
- Joint electorates with limited Muslim reservations.
- Delayed separation of Sindh from Bombay.
- Broadly unitary structure with central control over residual powers.
Outcome:
- The report’s compromises failed to satisfy both Hindu and Muslim communalists.
- Muslim League dissociated itself due to limited Muslim representation.
- Though not implemented, the Nehru Report became a starting point for future constitutional discussions.
Jinnah’s Response to the Nehru Report (1928)
Dissatisfaction and Demands:
- Jinnah, representing the Muslim League, proposed amendments to the Nehru Report at the Calcutta Conference (December 1928).
- The amendments included:
- One-third representation for Muslims in the central legislature.
- Reservation of seats for Muslims in Bengal and Punjab legislatures (until adult suffrage).
- Granting residual powers to provinces.
- These demands were not accepted.
Jinnah’s Fourteen Points (March 1929):
- A new framework outlining Muslim League’s future demands:
- Federal constitution with strong provincial autonomy.
- Muslim representation reflecting their population in legislatures and services.
- One-third share for Muslims in central legislature and cabinets.
- Separate electorates for Muslims.
- Veto power for minorities on issues affecting their interests.
- Protection of Muslim majority status in certain provinces.
- Separate provinces for Sindh, NWFP, and Baluchistan.
- Guarantees for religious freedom, cultural rights, education, and language.
Nehru Report’s Shortcomings:
- The report failed to satisfy various groups:
- Muslim League – Dissatisfied with Muslim representation.
- Hindu Mahasabha – Opposed concessions to Muslims.
- Sikh community – Concerns not addressed.
- Younger Congress (Nehru & Bose) – Dominion status deemed inadequate.
- This led to the formation of the “Independence for India League” by Nehru and Bose, advocating complete independence.
हिन्दी