FUTURE OF INDIA

Evening Post, Volume CIX, Issue 42, 19 February 1930, Page 9

FUTURE OF INDIA

LEARNING TO WALK

SPEECH RAISES ANGER

(From "The Post's" Representative.)

LONDON,-9th January. How Careful a Cabinet Minister or an Under-Secretary must be in his public utterances is exemplified by the ■way ■in which Lord Kussgll's speech at Cambridge lias been flashed across the world aud lias gained approval or disapproval. Tho speech was made at n Cambridge Labour Party meeting during the week-end, and ho was reported to havo said that Dominion status for India would not be possible for a .long time. Immediately critics of 'the Labour Government approved of Lord Kiissell's declaration and stated that it should .have been made • before LordIrwin 's pronouncement. Newspapers of India immediately seized upon the subject. The "Times" of India urged the IJnder-Secretary for India to lose no time in explaining exactly what ho meant. The Bombay "Chronicle" said that' the speech cleared the air, 4and was a broad hint to the Liberals, who were jubilant over tho prospect of the Bound-Table- Conference.

Earl Eussell, in an interview, stated

"I was reported in several newspapers to have stated that Dominion status for India was not possible at tho moment, arid would not be for a long, time. '.'.■'.

"Tho unfortunate part about the whole business is that I never used tho words attributed to me. What I did say whs that the ultimato object was Dominion status based upon some kind of,democracy. I wont.on to say rather.'•- chaffingly to:: my audience—that it had taken a very long-time.to work out democracy in England, and it was by no means certain that we had'reached success in our democratic institutions. I made it clear that the object was to lead India along the path which would eventually end in Dominion status. "It will bo seen how the mistake has arisen. Tho reference1 to 'a long time' seeras to have slipped into the wrong place." <

V VERBATIM REPORT. The" Evening Standard 1' representative seems to have taken a verbatim report of the speech. "Those of you who have read the newspapers," Lord Russell is reported to have said, "will see that our difficulties have- not been made less during the Christmas season. - Eesolutions have been passed -demanding the complete independence of India. They were brave words, but they were very foolish words, and nobody knows,'better1 than the Indians themselves that complete indcx^endence at this moment is impossible. . ■ ■

"Between Dominion status and complete independence- there is, not much difference,: and that is not'possible at this moment. When you have been bringing up a country and guiding it you cannot suddenly let go and say, 'Manage things for yourselves.' It takes practice to manage things \f or yourselves. How much,only those who have watched the struggle of democracy know.! Even the Labour Party, even the leaders of the Labour Party, found it difficult when they first took office, and we knew what we wanted.

"In India they would have insuperable difficulties in running things for themselves if we suddenly let go. ■There are many races and at least two dominant religious, and these races and religions do not work sympathetically together. And even in the discussions they/have been divided, and they have not arrived at any way of living with each other. What they would do if they were suddenly left to themselves, what -would happen, heaven only knows, and it is quite clear that Indians do not know. . .- "*

"A child must learn to walk before it can run, and without in tho least disparaging our subjects in the India Empire I say they have not yet learned to walk.and it will be some time be-, fore they can run." .

A STOEM OF AtfGEK. In the "Daily Herald" the following appeared after the first announcement of the speech: "The statement by Earl Kussell, the new TJndor-SecTctary for India, that Dominion status for India would not be possible 'for a long time' has created a storm of anger among Indian Moderates. 'In common with many other Labour members of Parliament, ■we are appalled at Lord Kussell's statement,' write Major Graham Pole and Mr. Andrew M'Laren. It has caused great rejoicings in the- Tory Party and among tlio ranks of tho extremists in India, who regard it as a 'timely exposure' of the real attitude of the Labour Party. It has, however, caused absoluto v consternation amongst those who have been co-operating with the Secretary of Stato and tho Viceroy in creating a now atmosphere. Already news is to hand that most of the loading Indians—such as the Bight Hon. Srinivasa Sastri, Sir Tcj Bahadur' Sapru, Sir Chaminlal Setalvad, Sir Phiroze Sethna, Mr. N. 0. Kelkar—to name only a few —have declined to have anything further to do with the Bound-Table Conference, and they state that no self-respecting Indian would come to that conference if this statement of Lord Eussell represents Libour policy. Well imight that' Tory of Tories, 'A.A.8.,* in the 'Evening Standard,' say that Lord Bussell, who has dismissed the Indian utterances of Messrs. Benn, Baldwin, and Irwin as 'foolish words,' ought,to be a Cabinet Minister. We call upon the Government to act at once to repair tho damage that threatens -the -whole Indian situation.'?