Government of India Acts: 1919 and 1935 Constitutional Reforms
The Government of India Acts of 1919 and 1935 were the major British constitutional frameworks for India, introducing dyarchy, provincial autonomy, and a federal structure that provided the blueprint for India's and Pakistan's post-independence constitutions.
Government of India Acts of 1919 and 1935 were the two major constitutional frameworks through which Britain attempted to manage India's growing nationalist pressure while retaining imperial control. The 1919 Act introduced dyarchy — a dual government system in provinces — while the 1935 Act offered full provincial autonomy and a federal structure, though retaining ultimate British control at the centre. The 1935 Act's provincial sections came into force in 1937 and provided the structural blueprint for both India's and Pakistan's constitutions after 1947.
The Government of India Act 1919 (Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms) was preceded by Edwin Montagu's August 1917 Declaration — the first British official commitment to "increasing association of Indians in every branch of the administration and the gradual development of self-governing institutions." The 1919 Act introduced the system of dyarchy in provinces: provincial subjects were divided into "transferred" (education, local self-government, public health, agriculture) administered by ministers responsible to elected legislatures, and "reserved" (law and order, finance, land revenue) retained by the Governor and his executive council. This bifurcation satisfied neither nationalists (who wanted full responsible government) nor British officials (who found it administratively unworkable). The Act also expanded the central and provincial legislatures, extended the franchise (though still very limited — about 10% of population), and established the principle of separate electorates for Muslims and other minorities.
The Simon Commission (1927–1929), appointed to review the 1919 Act's working, was boycotted by the Congress because it included no Indian members. The mass protests it provoked — including the Lala Lajpat Rai incident where he was lathi-charged and subsequently died — accelerated Congress's move toward Purna Swaraj (complete independence) at the Lahore Session (1929). The Round Table Conferences (1930–32) brought Congress, Muslim League, princely states, and British officials together but failed to agree on a constitutional settlement, partly because Gandhi's arrest after the Civil Disobedience movement complicated the negotiations.
What Were the Key Provisions of the Government of India Act 1935?
| Provision | Detail | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Provincial Autonomy | Provinces got full responsible government; dyarchy abolished in provinces | Governors became constitutional heads; ministers responsible to legislatures |
| All-India Federation | Proposed federation of British Indian provinces + princely states | Never came into force; princes did not ratify |
| Federal Court | Established Federal Court of India (1937) | Precursor to Supreme Court of India |
| Bicameral legislatures | Six provinces got bicameral legislatures | Upper houses (Legislative Councils) represented minorities and landowners |
| Separate electorates | Extended to Muslims, Sikhs, Indian Christians, Anglo-Indians, Europeans, Scheduled Castes (modified by Poona Pact) | Deepened communal political divisions; controversial legacy |
| Safeguards | Governors retained special emergency powers, override rights | Congress condemned these as "brakes without engine" |
| RBI and Federal Railway Authority | Reserve Bank of India and railway authority provided for | Institutional foundations that continued after independence |
How Did the Congress Respond to the 1935 Act?
The Congress condemned the 1935 Act as fundamentally unsatisfactory — it rejected the federal scheme (which would give conservative princes a blocking minority in the central legislature), criticised the governors' emergency powers ("brakes without engine"), and opposed the continuation of separate electorates. However, Nehru and Gandhi decided pragmatically to contest the 1937 provincial elections under the Act. Congress won decisive majorities in seven of eleven provinces and formed governments, gaining invaluable administrative experience and demonstrating its mass support. Congress governments introduced significant reforms (land revenue relief, tenancy legislation, promotion of khadi) before resigning in October 1939 to protest India's involvement in World War II without Indian consent.
What Was the Constitutional Legacy of the 1935 Act?
- Framework for Indian Constitution: Many provisions of India's 1950 Constitution drew directly from the 1935 Act — the federal structure, the division of powers between Centre and States, emergency provisions, the role of Governors, judicial review
- Pakistan's constitution: Pakistan used the 1935 Act (with amendments) as its constitution until 1956
- Civil service continuity: The Indian Civil Service (ICS) structures established under the Act continued as the IAS (Indian Administrative Service) framework
- Federal Court: The Federal Court of India (est. 1937) was the direct predecessor of the Supreme Court of India established under the 1950 Constitution
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the Montagu-Chelmsford Report and what did it introduce?
The Montagu-Chelmsford Report (1918) was the basis for the Government of India Act 1919; it introduced dyarchy in provinces — dividing provincial subjects into "transferred" (administered by elected ministers) and "reserved" (retained by the Governor) — as a transitional step toward responsible government.
What was dyarchy and why did it fail?
Dyarchy was the system introduced by the 1919 Act dividing provincial administration between elected ministers (responsible for transferred subjects) and the Governor's executive council (controlling reserved subjects); it failed because the division was unworkable — transferred departments lacked funds controlled by the reserved finance department, and ministers had responsibility without real power.
Why did Congress contest the 1937 elections despite criticising the 1935 Act?
Congress contested the 1937 elections despite condemning the 1935 Act to demonstrate its mass support through the democratic process and to use provincial governments to introduce reforms and build administrative capacity; it won majorities in seven provinces and formed governments that lasted until October 1939.
What was the significance of the Round Table Conferences (1930–32)?
The three Round Table Conferences brought British officials, Congress, Muslim League, princely states, and minority representatives together to negotiate a constitutional settlement; they failed to agree, partly because of the Congress-League deadlock on separate electorates, but the Communal Award (1932) that emerged from them and the Poona Pact became major political turning points.
How did the Government of India Act 1935 influence India's 1950 Constitution?
The 1935 Act provided the structural framework for the 1950 Indian Constitution's federal division of powers (Union, State, and Concurrent Lists), the role of Governors as constitutional heads of states, emergency provisions allowing central takeover of states, and the concept of judicial review, with many provisions copied almost verbatim.
Sources and Further Reading
According to IGNOU's BHIC-134, the Government of India Acts of 1919 and 1935 represent Britain's attempt to maintain imperial control while responding to nationalist pressure, and the 1935 Act's practical importance exceeded its nationalist rejection — providing the constitutional infrastructure that both India and Pakistan used in their post-independence governance.
- IGNOU BHIC-134: Units on Constitutional Reforms
- Granville Austin, The Indian Constitution: Cornerstone of a Nation
- B. Shiva Rao (ed.), The Framing of India's Constitution
- Ayesha Jalal, The Sole Spokesman