The Government of India Act 1919 [Introduction of Self- Government] Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms.

Introduction of Self- Government (1919-1947)
The Government of India Act 1919
The Morley-Minto Reforms failed to satisfy the aspirations of the Indians as they did not establish Parliamentary system of the Government in India.
During the time of 1st World War Indian National Congress became very active and it pressed for reforms.
In this response the British Government made a declaration on August 20, 1917, that its objective was the gradual introduction of responsible Government in India.
The Government of India Act of 1919 was thus enacted, which came into force in 1921.
This Act is also known as Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms (Montagu was the then Secretary of State for India and Lord Chelmsford was the then Viceroy of India).
Main features of Government of India Act 1919 were as follows:
1. It relaxed the central control over the provinces by demarcating and separating the central and provincial subjects. The Central and provincial legislatures were authorised to make laws on their respective list of subjects.
2. The structures of government continued to be centralised and unitary.
3. Under this Act, Provincial subjects were further divided into two parts i.e. transferred and reserved subjects.
The Transferred Subjects were to be administered by the Governor with the aid of Ministers responsible to the legislative council.
Educations, Agriculture, Local Self-Government etc subjects of lesser importance were included in the list of transferred subjects.
On the other hand, the reserved subjects were to be administered by the Governor and his executive council without being responsible to the legislative council.
Jail, Police, Justice, Finance and Irrigations, and comparatively more important subjects were included in the list of reserved subjects.
This dual scheme of governance was known as “Dyarchy” which is a term derived from the Greek words “Di” meaning two plus “Archia” meaning rule, the combined meaning of which is two authorities or double rule. However, this experiment was largely unsuccessful.
4. For the first time, this Act introduced bicameralism and direct elections in the Country. Thus, the Indian Legislative Council was replaced by a bicameral legislature consisting of an Upper House (Council of State) and a Lower House (Legislative Assembly). The majority of members of both the Houses were chosen by direct election. Both the Houses of the Central Legislature were have similar and equal powers.
5. The powers of the Central Legislature were enlarged. It could make laws for the whole of British India and with respect to all the matters contained in the Central List.
6. It required that three of the six members of the Viceroy’s executive Council (Other than the Commander-in-Chief) were to be the Indians.
7. It extended the principle of communal representation by providing separate electorates for Sikhs, Indian Christians, Anglo-Indians and Europeans.
8. It provided franchise to a limited number of people on the basis of property, tax or education.
9. It created a new office of the High Commissioner for India in London and transferred to him some of the functions which were earlier performed by the Secretary of State for India. He was to act as an agent of the Central Government as well as Provincial Governments of India.
10. It provided for establishment of a public service commission. Hence, a Central Public Service Commission was set up in 1926 for recruiting civil servants. (Note: This was done on the recommendation of the Lee Commission on Superior Civil Services in India).
11. It separated, for the first time, provincial budgets from the Central budget and authorised the provincial legislatures to enact their budgets.
12. It provided for the appointment of a statutory commission to inquire into and report on the working of this Act after ten years of its coming into force.
This Government of India Act 1919 however failed to fulfill the aspirations of the people of India, which led to an agitation by the Indian National Congress for “Swaraj” or “Self-Government” to be attained through the non-cooperation.
In 1924, a Reforms Enquiry Committee known as Muddiman Committee was appointed to inquire into and report on the working of the Reform of 1919.
The Committee submitted its Report in September, 1925.
In its Report the Committee recommended the continuance of the “diarchy” with slight modifications.
It was criticised by the members of the Central Assembly as an unsuccessful experiment in administration.
All these facts led to the appointment of Simon Commission.
@ashishbholalawclasses9575