MINTO-MORLEY REFORMS OF 1909

INTRODUCTION
Minto-Morley Reforms of 1909 or the Indian Councils Act 1909 was named after the Secretary
of State for India John Morley (Operated from London) and the Viceroy of India, the 4th Earl
of Minto. Minto, who, by this time had felt that the permanence of the British Administration
in India depends upon a sound appreciation of the changing conditions which surround it.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

• The Congress' reasonable intentions were not met by the Indian Councils Act of 1892.
• The division of Bengal was carried out by Lord Curzon in 1905. As a result, there
was a huge revolt in Bengal.
• The Indian National Congress (INC) also pushed for additional reforms and Indian self-
government.
• Earlier Congress leaders were moderates, but now radical leaders who believed in more
confrontational tactics were on the increase.
• The Simla Deputation met Lord Minto in 1906 and presented their proposal for a
separate electorate for Muslims, led by Aga Khan.
• John Morley was a member of India's Liberal government who aspired to improve the
country's governance.

INDIAN COUNCILS ACT OF 1909 IN THE NATURE OF CONCESSIONS TO

MODERATES

This Act was in the nature of concessions to please the Moderates. It was taken into hands by
the Indian Govt to rally to its side the Moderates in the Indian National Congress in order to to
buttress the authority of British bureaucracy. This time was now considered to be an
opportunity to bring in further political advances and to apply the electoral principle to
membership in India's imperial and local legislative councils, as well as to increase Indian
participation in the governance of British India. Therefore, the Indian Councils Act of 1909
was passed to rally the Moderates in the Indian National Congress and Muslims to its side.

KEY PROVISIONS OF THE ACT

1. Entry of an Indian into the Viceroy’s Executive Council

a. After great pressure from Morley, Satyendra P Sinha was named to the Viceroy's
Executive Council as the first Indian member.
2. Changes in the Central Legislature
a. The no. of additional members was now raised to the max. to 60. The Legislature thus
consisted of 60 members – of whom 28 were to be officials while the remaining 32 non
officials.
b. The want of separate electorate by the Muslim League was agreed upon wherein under
the ambit of non-officials, 5 Muslims could be elected via the process of separate
electorate. This Act, thus, introduced the concept of Communal Politics in India.
c. For elected members, it was declared that the territorial representation did not suit India
and that representation by classes and interests is the only practicable method of
embodying the elective principle in the constitution of the Indian Legislative Councils.
d. Earlier only discussion of financial bills was allowed, however no voting on financial
bills as well as asking supplementary questions was also allowed.
 3. Provincial Legislature:
a. Provincial Legislatures was now enlarged and expanded to 7 provinces i.e Madras,
Bengal, Bombay, United Province, Punjab, Burma and Assam under the Act of
1909.
b. The additional members of the Executive Councils of Bengal, Madras, Bombay and
United Provice was raised to 50 and that of Burma, Punjab and Assam was raised
to 30. The Government was also empowered to constitute similar Councils for the
Lieutenant- Governors as well.
c. The Act provided for non-official majorities in the provinces. The no. of additional
members who were elected from Chambers of Commerce, Universities,
Municipalities, Zamindars & District Board was also increased.

ASSESSMENT OF THE ACT

1. The Act introduced communal representation in Indian politics. This was intended to
stem the growing tide of nationalism in the country by dividing the people into
communal lines. The culmination of this step was seen in the partition of the country
along religious lines. The effects of differential treatment of different religious groups
can be seen to this day.
2. The Act did nothing to grant colonial self-government, which was Congress’s demand.
3. The Act did increase Indian participation in the legislative councils, especially at the
provincial levels.
4. Members were able to discuss the budget, but they were unable to make any significant
changes to it. They could ask questions but not compel the executives to respond to the
resolutions, which were more like recommendations to the government.
5. Although the Provincial Councils had a non-official majority, the outcome was
irrelevant because the non-official majority was invalidated by the election of
nominated members.