Round Table Conference

Edwin Montagu, Secretary of State for India, had stated in August 1917 that the British Government intended to move steadily towards 'the progressive realisation of responsible government in India.' But the success of the Montagu-Chelmsford scheme of devolution embodied in the 1919 Act was inhibited by the illiberal interpretation of the reforms by many governors, and the boycott of the new Councils by the Khilafatists and the Non-Cooperation movement. On 8 November 1927 the Secretary of State, Lord Birkenhead, announced the appointment of an Indian Statutory Commission, consisting of seven representatives of the British parties in Parliament, to review the Constitution, but Congress boycotted it and Viceroy Lord Irwin realised that its move to a more extreme nationalist policy was only in part a resentment against the Commission. There were many obstacles to constitutional advance - communal tension, the princely states, and the divergence in the aims of different Congress groups, but even these would not stem the movement against British control and Irwin envisaged a boycott by Hindu politicians of the Simon Report and any constitution based on it. He believed that after the Government had considered the Report, but before it placed proposals in front of Parliament, the Prime Minister might invite representatives from Parliament, British India and the States to discuss the constitutional problem. This was the embryo of the Round Table Conference scheme by which Irwin hoped to improve relations not only between the British and the Hindu nationalists, but also between Hindu and Muslim India, and British India and the Princely States. Materials before the Conference could include the Simon Report, the Butler (Indian States) Report, and any other documents that various groups might wish to submit. Irwin's initiative had won Indian Liberal and Moderate Congress support for a Round Table Conference, and most leaders had signed the Delhi Manifesto on 2 November 1929 offering cooperation with Britain in the framing of a new constitution. But on 31 December Gandhi rejected the Conference initiative and led a civil disobedience movement for the achievement of complete independence. In May 1930 Irwin, who felt that the attainment of Dominion status should be the natural outcome of India's political progress, made a further statement about a conference which would secure the greatest possible agreement for this aim. Parliament supported the plan, arrangements were put in hand, and representatives were invited to attend the first session of the Round Table Conference in London. There were 3 main delegations:. 1. British Delegationa) Government Section: Eight members, including Prime Minister Ramsay-Macdonald and Secretary of State for India Wedgwood Bean; b) Conservatives: Less reactionary than many expected, included the Marquess of Zetland, a former Governor of Bengal, and Sir Samuel Hoare; c) Liberals: Led by Lord Reading, a former Viceroy; Reading wanted the British Delegation to work as a team lest the Labour Government prove too generous in meeting Indian demands, but Benn was aware that Indian delegates must not feel that the British parties were planning a common front. 2. British India Delegation: Nominees of the Viceroy, with no mandates from the groups they represented, but eminent enough for any agreements they endorsed to carry great weight in India. Congress refused representation at the first session.a) Muslims: Led by the Aga Khan and made up of veteran politicians and professional men representing the various provinces, included Jinnah; b) Liberals and Moderates: A strong element of Hindu-lawyer-politicians and elder statesmen, for example Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru, leader of the Allahabad Bar; c) Minor Minorities: Representatives for the Sikhs, Depressed Classes, Justice Party, Anglo-Indians, Indian Christians, European non-official community, Indian women, trade unions, industry and commerce, and landowners; All were particularly concerned with the communal issue as the Simon Report had denied the Muslims an increased share of seats in the Punjab and Bengal on a population basis. Hindu communalists would make no concessions unless the Muslims backed a demand for Dominion status, yet the Muslims would not support this without prior agreement on the communal question. 3. Indian States Delegation: Included representatives of the great South Indian states of Hyderabad, Mysore and Travancore, the smaller states, and eight nominees from the Chamber of Princes. They attended the Conference predisposed by recent events to seek a redefinition of their constitutional rights. Their presence removed any idea of concentrating Conference affairs on the British India problem, particularly when their schemes for an All-India Federation were announced. These evolved after the Simon scheme for the separate political development of the British provinces, and later a British India federation, seemed to threaten the existence of the southern states. They developed a plan for a small aristocratic Federal Assembly which would also contain representatives of the Provinces and the Crown, envisaging the extension of responsible government to a British India Centre but with the transfer to a federal authority of matters common to both the states and British India. Basically the princes were offering to support the idea of full responsible government in return for complete internal autonomy for themselves. The idea was adopted and it was agreed that the first discussions of the Conference should concentrate on the question of an Indian federation. The first session of the Conference opened on 12 November 1930 and closed on 19 January 1931. All-India federation was the dominant principle throughout. It gave the Conference a specific aim without the British Delegation having to respond to a demand for Dominion status. It was agreed that a bi-cameral federal legislature, with princes and provinces represented in both houses, should be established. Reserved subjects would be transferred to the provinces, and responsible government to the federal authority. The real work of the Conference was done by the Federal Structure Committee. The Prime Minister closed the Conference with a pledge of responsibility with safeguards which contended the Indian Liberals, but the Muslims feared that it would not safeguard their interests in a largely Hindu government. During talks held with Lord Irwin in February 1931 Gandhi agreed that Congress should cooperate with the new scheme. He aimed to achieve unity among Indians over a national demand for independence to put before the Conference. The Federal Structure and Minorities Sub-Committees began to deliberate in September 1931 and the second session opened in London on 31 October. From the beginning it was more inflexible than the first and proved unable to accommodate the dualities of the Indian problem. Gandhi was encumbered by Congress orders to work for complete independence, and he was unsuccessful in attempts to settle the communal problem. The Princes had defined and hardened their attitudes towards an all-India federation and made their cooperation dependent on the acceptance of their terms, their general strategy being to work with the British Indian leaders for central responsibility provided the internal autonomy of the states was guaranteed. With a largely Conservative government in power and the effects of the slump being felt, the British Delegation was not prepared to concede as much freedom at the second Conference, but it closed on 1 December 1931 with the Prime Minister's re-affirmation of the statement that all-India federation was the ultimate aim and meanwhile provision would be made for provincial autonomy. If necessary the communal question would be settled separately. The third session opened on 17 November 1932 and closed on Christmas Eve. It was a formality and a poor semblance of earlier sessions, with only 46 delegates and lacking princely and British Labour delegates. Procedure was tightly controlled with a bill already prepared embodying the proposals for a federal constitution. These were accepted by a Joint Committee and finally incorporated into the Government of India Act of August 1935. [For an Organisation Table, see the handlist in the Asian & African Studies Reading Room]. Conference Procedure: The first session of the Conference opened with a brief public plenary session (RTC) devoted to a few formal set speeches of a non-controversial nature, followed by a plenary session of the whole Conference (RTC(F)) for the purpose of conducting a general preliminary discussion ranging over the whole field. It was limited to three days with individual speeches lasting about half an hour. At the beginning of this plenary session a Committee on the Conduct of business was set up to consider the procedure of the Conference (RTC(B)). It remained in being throughout the Conference but its main recommendations were presented for approval before the end of the plenary session. At the close of the plenary session the Conference went into a Committee of the Whole Conference (Federal Relations Committee RTC(F)) consisting of all delegates other than those from the Indian States. It appointed the following sub-committees to consider various topics in detail and report to the main committee:Federal Structure Committee RTC(F(S)): The creation of a federation as a part of Indian constitutional development; Provincial Committee RTC(F(P)): The constitution and powers of the Provincial Executive and its relations with the Provincial Legislatures; Minorities Committee RTC(F(M)); Burma Committee RTC(F(B)); NWFP Committee RTC(F(N)): Discussion on the question of full provincial status for the North West Frontier Province; Franchise Committee RTC(F(R)): The composition of the Provincial Legislatures and the representation of minorities and special interests; Defence Committee RTC(F(D)); Services Committee RTC(F(E): All-India services, their recruitment and control; Sind Committee RTC(F(I)): Discussion on the question of full provincial status for Sind; Federal Finance Committee RTC(F(E)) (second session only): Financial relations between the provinces and the central government; On receipt of the reports of its sub-committees the Committee of the Whole Conference discussed them and then itself reported over the whole of its field. The real work of the Conference was done by these committees. Each had a government minister as Chairman and had at least one British expert sitting. A plenary session of the whole Conference then met to receive the various reports and to frame the final report, which was followed by a formal and public final plenary session of the whole conference for the purpose of officially adopting the report. The delegations from India had their own secretariats and in addition the Secretariat of the Conference served all parties impartially arranging all the machinery of the Conference, briefing the Information Officer, and assisting the rapporteurs of the committees and sub-committees in drafting their reports. At the second session only the Federal Structure and Minorities Committee sat and a Federal Finance Committee was set up. The Round Table Conference Cabinet Committee was formed of those members of the British Delegation who were members or supporters of the Government and who sat on any Round Table Conference committee whose work was affected by the business under consideration. It was constituted by the Cabinet and was as small as possible with a view to frequent meetings. It acted as a body to settle government policy at the Conference without reference to the Cabinet as a whole. Its papers were kept in the custody of, and circulated by the Cabinet Office (IOR/L/PO/6/9A in the Private Office Papers lists the papers actually circulated to the Cabinet Committee). After the second session a Consultative Committee under the Viceroy's chairmanship was set up in India for more detailed discussions about federation among Indians themselves. The third session of the Conference had far fewer delegates and its machinery was less elaborate than that of the first two, with only twenty-two general meetings and no sub-committees. Delegates to the Round Table Conferences: [Abbreviations: BD - British Delegation; BID - British India Delegation; ISD - Indian States Delegation; 1-3 indicates attended 1st-3rd Sessions; HH - His Highness; where relevant the particular interest which a delegate represented and/or his status has been added, for example Muslims, Lawyer-Politician]. Aga Khan, HH the, BID, 1-3, Muslims; Abdul Qaiyum Khan, Nawab Sir Sahibzada, BID, 1, Muslims; Aiyar, Sir C P Ramaswami, BID, 1-2, Hindu Moderates, Lawyer-Politician; Ali Imam, Sir Syed, BID, 2, Muslims; Alwar, Col HH the Maharaja of, ISD, 1-2; Ambedkar, Dr Bhimrao Ramji, BID, 1-3, Untouchables; Aung Thin, U K S M, BID, 1, Burma; Ba Pe, U, BID, 1, Burma; Baroda, HH the Maharaja Gaekwar of, ISD, 1-2; Barooah, Srijut Chandradhar, BID, 1-2, Assam Nationalists; Basu, J N, BID 1-2, Bengal Legislative Council; Benn, RT Hon Wedgwood, BD, 1-2, Secretary of State for India, Labour Party; Benthall, E C, BID, 2, British Merchant; Bhopal, Lt-Col HH the Nawab of, ISD, 1-2; Bhutto, Sir Shah Nawaz Khan Ghulam Murtoza Khan, BID, 1-2, Muslims; Bikaner, Lt-Gen HH the Maharaja of, ISD, 1-2; Birla, G D, BID, 2, Merchant Classes; Bisheshwar Dayal Seth, Rai Bahadur Kunwar, BID, 1, British Indian Association of Oudh; Bobbili, Raja of, BID, 2, Zamindari; Butler, R A, BD, 3, Conservative Party; Carr, Sir Hubert Winch, BID, 1-3, European Non-Official Community; Carter, Richard Henry Archibald, Secretary-General; Chari, Rao Bahadur Krishnama, ISD, 2; Chhitari, Cpt Nawab Sir Muhammad Ahmad Said Khan, BID, 1-2, Muslims; Chintamani, Cy, BID, 1-2, Hindu Moderates; Cutch, HH the Maharao of, ISD, 2; Dadabhoy, Sir Maneckjee, BID, 2; Darbhanga, Maharajadhiraja Kameshwar Singh of, BID, 1-2; Datta, Dr S K, BID, 2, Indian Christians; Daudi, Maulvi Muhammad Shafi, BID, 2, Muslims; De Glanville, O, BID, 1; Dholpur, Lt-Col HH the Maharaj Rana, ISD, 1-2; Elliot, Maj W E, BD, 2, Conservative Party; Fazl-ul-Huq, Mr, BID, 1-2, Muslims; Foot, Isaac, BD, 1-2, Liberal Party; Gandhi, M K, BID, 2, Congress; Ghaznavi, A H, BID, 1-3, Muslims; Gidney, Lt-Col H A J, BID, 1-3, Anglo-Indians; Ginwala, Sir Padanji, BID, 2; Giri, V V, BID, 2; Hailsham, Rt Hon the Viscount, BD, 1-2, Conservative Party; Haksar, Col K N, ISD, 1-2; Hamilton, Sir Robert, BD, 1-2, Liberal Party; Henderson, Rt Hon Arthur, BD, 2, Labour Party; Hidayat Husain, Khan Bahadur Hafiz, BID, 1-2; Hidayatullah, Sir Ghulam Hussain, BID, 1-2; Hoare, Rt Hon Sir Samuel, BD, 1-3, Conservative Party; Hydari, Nawab Sir Muhammad Akbar, ISD, 1-2; Indore, HH the Maharaja of, ISD, 2; Iqbal, Sir Muhammad, BID, 2-3, Muslims; Ismail, Sir Mirza M, ISD, 1-2; Iyengar, Rangaswami, BID, 2, Congress; Jadhav, Bhaskarrao Vithojirao, BID, 1-2; Jamal Muhammad, Mr, BID, 2, Muslims; Jammu & Kashmir, Col HH the Maharaja of, ISD, 1; Jayakar, M R, BID, 1-3, Hindu Responsivists; Jehangir, Sir Cowasji, BID, 1-3, Hindu Moderates; Jinnah, M A, BID, 1-2, Muslims; Jones, T F Gavin-, BID, 1-2; Joshi, N M, BID, 1-3, Trade Unions; Jowitt, Sir William, BD, 2, Labour Party; Kapurthala, Col HH the Maharaja of, ISD, 2; Kelkar, N C, BID, 3, Hindu Communalists; Khan, Nawab Liaqat Hayat, ISD, 2; Korea, Raja of, ISD, 2; Law, Dr Narendra Nath, BID, 1-2; Lawrence, F W Pethick, BD, 2, Labour Party; Lothian, Most Hon the Marquess of, BD, 1-3, Liberal Party; MacDonald, Rt Hon J Ramsay, BD, 1-3, Prime Minister, Labour Party; Malaviya, Pandit Madan Moham, BID, 2, Hindu Communalists; Mehr Shah, Nawab Sahibzada Sir Sayed Muhammad, BID, 2, Muslims; Mehta, Sir Manubhai Nand-shaker, ISD, 1-2; Mitra, Sir Bhupendra Nath, BID, 1; Mitter, Sir Provash Chunder, BID, 1-2, Hindu, Viceroy's Council; Mody, H P, BID, 1-2, Industry; Moonje, Dr B S, BID, 1-2, Hindu Responsivists; Mudaliyar, Diwan Bahadur Ramaswami, BID, 1-3, Justice Party; Muhammad Ali, Maulana, BID, 1, Muslims; Naidu, Mrs Sarojini, BID, 2, Indian Women; Narendra Nath, Diwan Bahadur Raja, BID, 1-2, Hindu Communalists; Nawangar, Lt-Col HH the Maharaja of, ISD, 1-2; Ohn Ghine, M M, BID, 1, Burma; Padshah, Sayed Muhammad, BID, 2, Muslims; Pannir Selvam, Rao Bahadur A T, BID, 1-2; Parlakimedi, Raja of, BID, 1; Patiala, Maj-Gen HH the Maharaja of, ISD, 1; Patro, Rao Bahadur Sir Annepu Parasuramadas Garu, BID, 1-3, Justice Party; Pattani, Sir Prabhashankar, ISD, 1-2; Paul, K T, BID, 1, Indian Christians; Peel, Rt Hon William Robert Wellesley, Earl, BD, 1-3, Conservative Party; Qaiyam Khan, Nawab Sir Abdul, BID, 2, Muslims; Raghavaiah, Diwan Bahadur T, ISD, 2; Ramachandra Rao, Diwan Bahadur M, BID, 1-2; Reading, Most Hon the Marquess of, BD, 1-3, Liberal Party; Rewa, HH the Maharaja of, ISD, 1-2; Sampuran Singh, Sardar, BID, 1-2, Sikhs; Sangli, HH the Chief of Sahib of, ISD, 1-2; Sankey, John, Viscount, BD, 1-2, Lord Chancellor, Labour Party; Sapru, Sir Tej Bahadur, BID, 1-3, Hindu Moderates; Sarila, Raja of, ISD, 2-3; Sastri, Rt Hon Srinivasa, BID, 1-2, Hindu Moderates; Sayed Sultan Ahmed, Sir, BID, 2; Setalvad, Sir Chiminlal, BID, 1-2, Hindus; Seth, Rai Bahadur Kunwar Bisheshwar Dayal, BID, 2; Sethna, Sir Phiroze, BID, 1-2, Hindu Moderates; Shaha'at Ahmad Khan, Dr, BID, 1-3, Muslims; Shafi, Sir Muhammad, BID, 1-2, Muslims; Shah Nawaz, Begum, BID, 1-3, Indian Women; Shaukat Ali, Maulana, BID, 2, Muslims; Sher Muhammad Khan of Domeli, Cpt Raja, BID, 1-2, Muslims; Shiva Rao, B, BID, 1-2; Smith, Rt Hon Hastings Bertrand Lees-, BD, 2, Labour Party; Snell, Henry, Baron, BD, 2, Labour Party; Srinivasan, M R Ry, Rao Bahadur, BID, 1-2; Stanley, Maj the Hon Oliver, BD, 2, Conservative Party; Subbarayan, Mrs, BID, 1-2, Indian Women; Sultan Ahmed, Sir Sayed, BID, 1; Sultan Ahmed Khan, Sardar Sahibzada, ISD, 1-2; Tambe, Shripad Balwant, BID, 1-2, Hindu Responsivists; Thakurdas, Sir Purshotamdas, BID, 2-3, Business Community; Tara Singh, BID, 3, Sikhs; Thomas, Rt Hon James Henry, BD, 2, Labour Party; Ujjal Singh, Sardar Sahib Sardar, BID, 1-2, Sikhs; White, Henry Graham, BD, 1-2, Liberal Party; Winterton, Edward Turnour, Lord, BD, 3, Conservative Party; Wood, Charles Edgar, BID, 1-2; Zafrullah Khan, Chaudhuri, 1-2, Muslims; Zetland, Marquess of, BD, 1-2, Conservative Party

The documents are entirely concerned with the three Round Table Conference sessions and the practical arrangements for them. For the most part they consist of original papers issued by the Secretariat-General of the Conference and they form the basis of Official Publications relating to it (see 'other sources'), viz: (i) copies of documents referred to at meetings or reports and conclusions emerging from them, (ii) summary minutes of the conclusions reached at meetings, (iii) full stenographic notes of the proceedings of each meeting with lists of delegates attending, (iv) files concerning practical arrangements and miscellaneous items such as seating plans and specimen tickets. The material has been arranged in the following order:Q/RTC/1-33 Officially bound volumes of documents, reports, minutes and stenographic notes for all three sessions. Minutes only were issued for the third; Q/RTC/34 Officially bound proceedings of the Round Table Conference Consultative Committee; Q/RTC/35-55 Unbound documents, which duplicate (with many omissions) and occasionally supplement the contents of the volumes; Q/RTC/56-60 Unbound records of the Cabinet Committee and British Delegation to the Conference; Q/RTC/61-62 Miscellaneous items and files of correspondence relating to practical arrangements; The arrangement follows the order imposed by the officially-bound volumes and for each item the original reference has been noted as this is important for identifying the various committees. Full details have been given in the section of the list covering the bound volumes, and where duplication occurs in the unbound material a cross reference is used.

Unrestricted

Official:. Public and Judicial Department Papers (IOR/L/PJ). These records, which contain the main files of official India Office correspondence minuting on the Round Table Conference, are divided into two series: 1) IOR/L/PJ/7 Public and Judicial Department Files 1930-50. Relevant material may be traced through annual registers and indexes for 1930-31, IOR/Z/L/PJ/7/l-2. 2) IOR/L/PJ/9 Public and Judicial (Reforms) Files 1930-41, see IOR/Z/L/PJ/9/3-4 for comprehensive register and index. Private Office Collection (IOR/L/PO). Contains unofficially registered documents mainly composed of private letters, telegrams and memoranda. The collection provides invaluable background material as it relates to the preparations, composition, political considerations and procedure of the Conference in the weeks leading up to it. Private Papers:. Birkenhead Collection (Mss Eur D703): Papers of the 1st Earl of Birkenhead as Secretary of State for India 1924-28; Halifax Collection (Mss Eur C152): Papers of the 1st Baron Irwin (later 1st Earl of Halifax) as Viceroy 1926-31; Reading Collection (Mss Eur E238): Papers, 1921-35, of the 1st Marquess of Reading, Viceroy 1921-26; Simon Collection (Mss Eur F77): Papers of the 1st Viscount Simon as Chairman of the Indian Statutory Commission 1927-30; Templewood Collection (Mss Eur E240): Papers of Sir Samuel Hoare (later 1st Viscount Templewood) as Secretary of State for India 1931-35; . Official Publications (V(19)12187/1-2, 12188/1-2): Contain printed details of the proceedings of the sub-committees of the first and second sessions of the Conference, based on the typed stenographic notes in 'IOR/Q'. Proceedings of the plenary sessions and Committee of the Whole Conference are contained in Parliamentary Papers (HoC) 1931-32 voIs 6 & 8, and for the third session see Parliamentary Papers (HoC) 1931-32 vol 2.