Non-cooperation Movement;

Simon Commission;
Govt. of India Act 1935
 Non-cooperation Movement
 The Non-cooperation movement was launched on 1
August 1920 by Mahatma Gandhi with the aim of self-
governance and obtaining full independence as
the Indian National Congress (INC) withdraw its support
for British reforms following the Rowlatt Act of 21
March 1919, and the Jallianwala Bagh massacre of 13
April 1919.
 TheRowlatt Act in March 1919, suspended the rights of
defendants in sedition trials;
 The Act motivated Gandhi to conceive the idea
of satyagraha (truth), which he saw as synonymous with
independence. 
Provisions of Non-cooperation Movement
Gandhi's planning included:
Persuading all Indians to withdraw their labour from any activity that
"sustained the British government and economy in India", including
British industries and educational institutions.
Promoting “self-reliance” by spinning khadi,
Buying Indian made goods only and doing away with English clothes,
Called for the restoration of the Khilafat in Turkey and the end
to untouchability.
The resulting public meetings and strikes (hartals) led to the first
arrests of both Jawaharlal Nehru and his father,  Motilal Nehru, on 6
December 1921.
Through non-violent means or Ahimsa, protesters would refuse to buy
British goods, adopt the use of local handicrafts and picket liquor
shops. 
 How the movement ends
The movement ended, as Nehru described in his autobiography, "suddenly"
in February 1922 following the violent incident of Chauri Chaura.
On 5 February 1922 a clash took place at Chauri Chaura, a small town in
the district of Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh. A police officer had attacked some
volunteers picketing a liquor shop. A whole crowd of peasants that had
gathered there went to the police chowki (station). The mob set fire to the
police chowki with some 22 police men inside it.
Mahatma Gandhi felt that the revolt was veering off-course, and was
disappointed that the revolt had lost its non-violent nature. He did not want
the movement to degenerate into a contest of violence, with police and
angry mobs attacking each other back and forth, victimizing civilians in
between. Gandhi appealed to the Indian public for all resistance to end,
went on a fast lasting 3 weeks, and called off the non-cooperation
movement.
 Impacts
Itwas a total shock to British authorities and a massive
encouragement to millions of Indian nationalists.
Unity in the country was strengthened and many Indian
schools and colleges were made.
Indian goods were encouraged.
The movement was successful enough to break the back of
British rule,.
The ideas of Ahimsa and non-violence, and Gandhi's
ability to rally hundreds of thousands of common citizens
towards the cause of Indian independence, were first seen
on a large scale in this movement through the summer of
1920. 
 The Simon Commission
At the time of introducing the Montagu–Chelmsford Reforms in 1919,
the British Government declared that a commission would be sent to India
after ten years to examine the effects and operations of the constitutional
reforms and to suggest more reforms for India.
InNovember 1927, the British government appointed the Simon
Commission to report on India's constitutional progress for introducing
constitutional reforms, as promised.
The commission arrived in British India in 1928 to study constitutional reform.
One of its members was Clement Attlee, of the Labour Party, who became
committed to Indian independence by 1934 and achieved that goal as Prime
Minister in 1947.
The Commission was strongly opposed by many in India . It was opposed
by Nehru, Gandhi, Jinnah, the Muslim League and the Indian National
Congress because it contained seven members of the British Parliament but no
Indians. Indians saw it as a violation to their right of self determination and
insult to their self respect.
Prominent Indian nationalist Lala Lajpat Rai led a protest in Lahore.
 Members of the Commission
Simon Commission, was a group of seven British
Members of Parliament under the chairmanship of
Sir John Simon.
Sir John Simon, MP for Spen Valley (Liberal, chairman)
Clement Attlee, MP for Limehouse (Labour)
Harry Levy-Lawson, 1st Viscount Burnham
Edward Cadogan, MP for Finchley (Conservative)
Vernon Hartshorn, MP for Ogmore (Labour)
George Lane-Fox, MP for Barkston Ash (Conservative)
Donald Howard, 3rd Baron Strathcona and Mount Royal
 Outcome of the Commission
The Commission published its 2-volume report in May 1930.
Itproposed the abolition of dyarchy and the establishment of
representative government in the provinces.
Italso recommended that separate communal electorates be
retained, but only until tensions between Hindus and Muslims had
died down.
Notingthat educated Indians opposed the Commission and also that
communal tensions had increased instead of decreased, the British
government opted for another method (dominion status) for India.
The outcome of the Simon Commission was the Government of
India Act 1935, which called for "responsible" government at the
provincial level in India but not at the national level—that is a
government responsible to the Indian community rather than
London. It is the basis of many parts of the Indian Constitution. In
1937 the first elections were held in the Provinces, resulting in
 Outcome of the Commission
Clement Attlee
was deeply moved by his experience
on the Commission, and endorsed the final report.
However by 1933 he argued that British rule was
alien to India and was unable to make the social and
economic reforms necessary for India's progress. He
became the British leader most sympathetic to
Indian independence (as a dominion), preparing him
for his role in deciding on Indian independence as
British Prime Minister in 1947.
The Government of India Act 1935
An Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom
It originally received Royal assent in August 1935.
Until 1999, it was the longest Act of (British)
Parliament ever enacted - 321 sections and 10
schedules.
The Act led to –
◦ Establishment of RBI.
◦ FPSC, PPSC, JPSC.
◦ Federal Court in 1937.
◦ Bicameralism in 6 provinces
(Bombay, Madras, Bengal, Bihar, Assam and United
Provinces) out of 11 provinces.
Salient Features
The Government of India Act, 1935 derived
material from four key sources
◦ Report of the Simon Commission,
◦ discussions at the Third Round Table
Conference,
◦ the White Paper of 1933 and
◦ the reports of the Joint select committees.
 Salient Features
Abolition of provincial dyarchy and introduction of dyarchy at
centre – reserved list and transferred list.
Provision for an All India Federation with British India territories
and princely states.
Bicameral Federal Legislature
◦ Council of States – Upper House – 260 members – 156 from British India,
104 from Indian Princely States.
◦ Federal Assembly – Lower House – 375 – 250 from British India and 125
from Princely states
Provincial Autonomy
◦ the entire provincial administration was instructed to the responsible
ministers who were controlled and removed by the provincial legislatures
◦ divided the powers between the Centre and provinces in terms of three lists
- Federal List (for Centre, with 59 items), Provincial List (for Provinces,
with 54 items), and Concurrent list (for both, with 36 items).
 Salient Features
 Establishment of Federal Court
 Extension of Franchise - the act introduced for the first time the
direct elections. About 10% of the total population got the voting
rights.
 Reorganization of the provinces –
◦ Separation of Sind from Bombay, Splitting Bihar and Orissa
into separate provinces, Complete separation of Burma from
India, detachment of Aden from India and establishing as a
separate colony.
 Safeguards and Reservations
◦ would serve as checks and limitations on such undesirable
tendencies which might lead to the failure of the responsible
government in India.
 Federal Railway Authority, Federal RBI
 Assessment
 No preamble: the ambiguity of British commitment to
dominion status – “progressive realization of 
responsible government in India as an integral Part of the 
British Empire
 No 'Bill of Rights'
 No dominion status like Canada or Australia. This act by providing
separate electorates for Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Europeans, Anglo
Indians, Indian Christians etc. proved to be further an instrument of
disintegrating India.
 Excess "safeguards“ - the provincial Governors retained
important reserve powers, and the British authorities also retained
a right to suspend responsible government.
◦ designed to enable the British Government to intervene
whenever it saw the need in order to maintain British
responsibilities and interests. It was over obstructing and Nehru
Assessment
The Federal part never implemented
Not accepted by the Indian leadership –
◦ Nehru called it a "Charter of Slavery“;

◦ Jinnah called it, "thoroughly rotten,

fundamentally bad and totally unacceptable."
 1937 Indian provincial elections

Provincialelections were held in British India in the winter of

1936-37 as mandated by the Government of India Act 1935.
Electionswere held in eleven provinces -Madras, Central
Provinces, Bihar,  Orissa,  United Provinces,  Bombay Presidency, 
Assam,  NWFP,  Bengal, Punjab and Sindh.
The final results of the elections were declared in February 1937.
The Indian National Congress emerged in power in eight of the
provinces – the exceptions being Punjab and Sindh.
The All-India Muslim League failed to form the government in
any province.
The Congress ministries resigned in October and November 1939,
in protest against Viceroy Lord Linlithgow's action of declaring
India to be a belligerent in the Second World War without
consulting the Indian people.