THE CHANGES IN INDIA.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1348, 27 January 1912, Page 4

THE CHANGES IN INDIA.

English papers which left London a day or two after the holding of the Delhi Coronation Durbar contain indications of the feelings with which the great administrative changes announced by the KingEmpekor on that occasion were received both in England and in India. The transfer of the Imperial capital from Delhi to Calcutta, with the implied promise of provincial autonomy, aroused less interest in many quarters than the reuniting of the sundered Province of Bengal. The partition, when it was effected, under the Viceroyalty of Loud Cukzon, was bitterly resented by the Bengalis, and has been regarded as one of the causes of the subsequent outbreaks of seditibn. The resentment was not unnatural, for the cutting-up of the province seems to have had little but administrative convenience to recommend it. The Bengalis could not but regard it as a reminder that they were a conquered race, and such a reminder seemed at the time like a studied affront to their national aspirations. They were, accordingly, overjoyed at the King's •, announcement that Bengal would again be united. For this they were content that the capital of India should be removed into another province. The expressions of their representative men and their newspapers showed that they thought no price too great for the revocation of tha hated partition, The Mohammedans were not so pleased. Partition had been rather favourable to them, in that they had previously complained of Hindu domination in Bengal, whereas in the sub-province of Eastern Bengal and Assam they were in a majority. Not much evidence of their attitude to the new scheme is available, but it may be hoped that the Viceroy and_ his Council were right in believing that it would be "a source of unbounded gratification" to the Mohammedans throughout India to see Delhi, the ancient capital df the Moghuls, restored to its proud position as the seat of Empire.

The Times, correspondent at. t,he Durbar camp noted "great soreness" among the Mohammedans there. "You gave us solemn pledges," they said, "that our brethren of Eastern Bengal would not again be placed under the domination of Calcutta, and now you have broken your word,'' Thi Timu pointo out, now? ever, that the Biibsidiaxj changes,

comprising the reversion of Assam to its olrl position as ;i Chief Comihissionership under the direction of the Government of India, and the creation of a new province on the western side of Bengal, by uniting Behar, Chota, Nagpur, and Orissa under a Lieutenant-Governor will give the Mohammedans numerical equality, if not superiority, in the new and compact Province of Bengal. Possibly v/hen this is realised, the Mohammedan soreness will pass away.

The dissatisfaction of the European residents of Calcutta may not he so easily disposed of. "The European community to a man," said The, 'Times correspondent, "regard the transfer of the capital to Delhi as unfair to Calcutta and mischievous in itself, whilst special resentment is fclfc at the secrecy with which a change so momentous was resolved upon." The Englishman says Calcutta will suffer a severe blow to her commerce, and the Statesman declares that Lord Hahdinge "must go" for giving such advice to the King. On the other hand there has been a feeling among the English in Bengal that the supreme Government located in their midst has meddled too much in their affairs, and they look favourably upon the prospect _of increased autonomy. Anglo-Indian opinion in other centres appears to have been divided and not fully formed. The Bombay Times, however, thinks the change of capital will be universally supported. Neither English nor Indians have had much to say about the intention to grant to the natives a larger share in the government of the country. Taking a general view it may be said that the administrative changes were well received, but that the "wave of enthusiasm" predicted by Lord Hardinge was not immediately apparent. It may have arrived siuce.

In England, the House of Lords furnished a dramatic scene when the King's announcements were communicated by Lord Morley. Lord Lansdowne and Lord Curzon could not but see in the changes a departure from their own policy as former Viceroys of India. Disapproval can be read between the lines of their speeches. Loirn Lansdowne said that what had been announced was "a great, sudden and violent change of policy,'' _which would certainly provoke criticism. But, he added; "The word of the King-Emperor has been passed and that word is irrevocable." Lord Curzon, who, it will be recalled, was the author of the partition of Bengal, was less restrained. The Westminster Gazette described him as "almost too angry to speak;" He declared that the changes announced involved so abrupt a de : parture from tho policy, not only of the past decade, 1 but of the past century or more, bore so strong a political flavour and derived such an unprecedented character from being placed at a moment of great solemnity in the lips of the Sovereign,' that they demanded the closest attention of the House. Both Houses will discuss the whole matter early in the coming session. The newspapers were generally favourable to the scheme. The Times, in particular, thought that when the people of India had had tijne to grasp its full bearings, they would recognise in it "a measure of constructive statesmanship mostly to be promulgated from the lips of the Sovereign himself." New Zcalanders, wc have no doubt, sympathise fully with tho general principlo ol founding Imperial power, in India as elsewhere, upon the goodwill and increased freedom of the governed, and they can only hope that experience will prove the new developments m India to have been well devised and well timed.