CABINET MISSION PLAN

1) ELECTIONS WERE HELD and muslims win in muslimsmajoriyty areas and congress
won in hindu dominated areas
2) The question was the foem of government tobe adopted(own views)
3) To solve this problem cabinet mission arrives on march 24
4) Met separately with the two parties
5) It met wiith congress on april 2 and stance of congress
6) It met with quaid on april 3
7) Joint meeting on the begineing of may
a) Question was same sovereign sytate for whole india or two independent states
8) However thebritish gave their verdict on 16 mau that the two independednt states
oare not possible due to some reasons.at the same time they accepted that muslim
are different and need their rights to be fulfilled
9) Following were recommendations of the pakn
a)

ADVANTAGEESS

1)

It effectively allowed the election of Indians to the various legislative councils in

India for the first time. Previously some Indians had been appointed to legislative
councils. The majorities of the councils remained British government
appointments. Moreover the electorate was limited to specific classes of Indian
nationals;

2)

The introduction of the electoral principle laid the groundwork for a parliamentary
system even though this was contrary to the intent of Morley

Muslims had expressed serious concern that a first past the post electoral system, like
that of Britain, would leave them permanently subject to Hindu majority rule. The Act of
1909 stipulated, as demanded by the Muslim leadership

that Indian Muslims be allotted reserved seats in the Municipal and District
Boards, in the Provincial Councils and in the Imperial Legislature;
that the number of reserved seats be in excess of their relative population (25
percent of the Indian population); and,
that only Muslims should vote for candidates for the Muslim seats ('separate
electorates').

FORMATION

In 1906, Morley announced in the British parliament that his government wanted to introduce
new reforms for India, in which the locals were to be given more powers in legislative affairs.
With this, a series of correspondences started between him and Lord Minto, the then
Governor General of India. A committee was appointed by the Government of India to
propose a scheme of reforms. The committee submitted its report, and after the approval of
Lord Minto and Lord Morley, the Act of 1909 was passed by the British parliament. The Act
of 1909 is commonly known as the Morley-Minto Reforms.
MAJOR ADVANTAGES
1)
2)
3)
4)

SEPARATE ELECTORATE FOR MUSLIMS

ELECTIVE REPRESENTATIVES TRAINED POLITICIANS
VARIOUS BILLS WERE PASSED
FIRST CONSTITUTIONAL FOR INDIA HARBINGER FOR NEW
CONSTITUTIONS

DISADVANTAGES
1)
2)
3)

MAJPORY NON OFFICIAL BUT INEFFECTIVE

ONLY CONSULTATIVE IN NATURE
NOT DEMOCRACTIC RATHER ROYAL PAVILIONS

Morley-Minto Reforms[edit]
John Morley, the Liberal Secretary of State for India, and the Conservative GovernorGeneral of India, The Earl of Minto, believed that cracking down on uprising in Bengal was
necessary but not sufficient for restoring stability to the British Raj after Lord Curzon's
partitioning of Bengal. They believed that a dramatic step was required to put heart into loyal
elements of the Indian upper classes and the growing Westernised section of the
population......
They produced the Indian Councils Act of 1909 (Morley-Minto reforms), these reforms did
not go any significant distance toward meeting the Indian National Congress demand for 'the
system of government obtaining in Self-Governing British Colonies'. The act is also
sometimes called minto-Morley reform but that is not the correct citation. The Act of 1909
was important for the following reasons:

It effectively allowed the election of Indians to the various legislative councils in India for
the first time. Previously some Indians had been appointed to legislative councils. The
majorities of the councils remained British government appointments. Moreover the
electorate was limited to specific classes of Indian nationals;

The introduction of the electoral principle laid the groundwork for a parliamentary system
even though this was contrary to the intent of Morley. As stated by Burke and Quraishi

To Lord Curzon's apprehension that the new Councils could become 'parliamentary bodies
in miniature', Morley vehemently replied that, 'if it could be said that this chapter of reforms
led directly or indirectly to the establishment of a parliamentary system in India, I for one
would have nothing at all to do with it'. But he had already confessed in a letter to Minto in
June 1906 that while it was inconceivable to adapt English political institutions to the 'nations
who inhabit India...the spirit of English institutions is a different thing and it is a thing that we
cannot escape, even if we wished...because the British constituencies are the masters, and

they will assuredly insist... all parties alike... on the spirit of their own political system being
applied to India.' He never got down to explaining how the spirit of the British system of
government could be achieved without its body.

Muslims had expressed serious concern that a first past the post electoral system, like
that of Britain, would leave them permanently subject to Hindu majority rule. The Act of
1909 stipulated, as demanded by the Muslim leadership

that Indian Muslims be allotted reserved seats in the Municipal and District
Boards, in the Provincial Councils and in the Imperial Legislature;
that the number of reserved seats be in excess of their relative population (25
percent of the Indian population); and,
that only Muslims should vote for candidates for the Muslim seats ('separate
electorates').

These concessions were a constant source of strife from 1909 to 1947. British
statesmen generally considered reserved seats as regrettable in that they encouraged
communal extremism as Muslim candidates did not have to appeal for Hindu votes and
vice versa. As further power was shifted from the British to Indian politicians in 1919,
1935 and afterward, Muslims were ever more determined to hold on to if they could not
expand the reserved seats and their weightage. However, Hindu politicians repeatedly
tried to eliminate reserved seats as they considered them to be undemocratic and
hindering the development of a shared Hindu-Muslim Indian national feeling.
In 1906, Morley announced in the British parliament that his government wanted to
introduce new reforms for India, in which the locals were to be given more powers in
legislative affairs. With this, a series of correspondences started between him and Lord
Minto, the then Governor General of India. A committee was appointed by the
Government of India to propose a scheme of reforms. The committee submitted its
report, and after the approval of Lord Minto and Lord Morley, the Act of 1909 was
passed by the British parliament. The Act of 1909 is commonly known as the MorleyMinto Reforms.
Major provisions of the Act[edit]
The Act amended the Indian Councils Acts of 1861 and 1892.[1] Its major provisions are
as follows:
1. The member of the Legislative Councils, both at the Center and in the provinces, were
to be of four categories i.e. ex officio members (Governor General and the members of
their Executive Councils), nominated official members (those nominated by the Governor
General and were government officials), nominated non-official members (nominated by
the Governor General but were not government officials) and elected members (elected
by different categories of Indian people).
2. The maximum number of nominated and elected members of the Legislative Council
at the Center was increased from 16 to 60. The number did not include ex-officio
members.[2]
3. The maximum number of nominated and elected members of the provincial legislative
councils under a governor or lieutenant-governor was also increased. It was fixed as 50

in Bengal, Bombay, Madras, United Provinces, and Eastern Bengal and Assam, and 30
in Punjab, Burma, and any lieutenant-governor province created thereafter. Legislative
councils were not created for provinces under a chief commissioner.[3]
4. The right of separate electorate was given to the Muslims.
5. Official members were to form the majority but in provinces non-official members
would be in majority.
6. The members of the Legislative Councils were permitted to discuss the budgets,
suggest the amendments and even to vote on them; excluding those items that were
included as non-vote items. They were also entitled to ask supplementary questions
during the legislative proceedings.
7. The Secretary of State for India was empowered to increase the number of the
Executive Councils of Madras and Bombay from two to four.
8. Two Indians were nominated to the Council of the Secretary of State for Indian Affairs.
9. The Governor-General was empowered to nominate one Indian member to his
Executive Council.