Montague Chelmsford

Introduction 

The Montague-Chelmsford Reforms is generally called Government of India Act, 1919. It was aimed to gradually introduce a progressive government in India. This was the direct result of the Home Rule Movement in India. The provisions of the Act were finally enforced in February 1921.

Provisions of the Act 

It had separate provisions for the provinces and the centre. In the provinces the most important feature was the introduction of Dyarchy or the rule of the two (executive councillors and popular ministers). Subjects were classified into two categories – the reserved subjects and the transferred subjects. The Reserved subjects included land revenue, finance, law and order, irrigation and were to be administered by the governor and his executive council. The Transferred subjects included healt, education, industry, agriculture, local governance and were to be administered by the ministers nominated from among the elected members of the council.

The Act also provided the governor emergency provisions when he can overrule the minsters and take over the administration of the Transferred subjects also. Besides, the ministers were responsible to the legislative council and had to resign if a no-confidence motion is passed against them by the legislature. But the executive council of the governor was not responsible to the legislature.

At the centre, the Governor General was the chief executive authority and had full control over the reserved subjects of the provinces. Out of the eight members of the governor-general council, only three were to be Indians, rest British. The Legislature was Bicameral – lower house or central legislative assembly with 144 members and the upper house or the council of the state with 60 members. In the upper house, out of the 144 members 103 were elected, rest nominated, while in the upper house 34 elected and the rest nominated.

Drawbacks of the Act 

The reforms failed to satisfy the Indian leaders, as it was full of drawbacks like at the centre, the legislature had no control and in provinces the diarchy and the classification of the subjects were impractical and unworkable. Both the Congress and the Muslim League rejected the reform.