-
His Highness's letter is carefully documented
and it will be seen that it is signed by him in Lois capacity as Chancellor
of the Chamber of Princes and is described in the final sentence as an
official letter. It concludes with a specific request that "an authoritative
and early announcement" should be made by His Majesty s Government in order
"to eliminate the Princes" serious concern and misgivings on these matters.
-
His Excellency the Crown Representative
has little doubt that such concern and misgivings are in fact genuinely
entertained by the great majority of Indian Princes, particularly by the
more conservative among then1, and is not inclined to attach any great
importance to such public declarations in the opposite sense as have been
made by their Highnesses of Kashmir and Indore. The Princes may to some
extent derive comfort and re-assurance from the generous terms in which
His Majesty has referred in his message to India published on the 13th
June 194n to "their traditions of loyalty and attachment to his Throne"
and to their unstinting offers of men and money and personal services for
the war. But they are not likely to be reassured by a reference to the
fact that Sir Stafford Cripps' offer was in terms withdrawn when the negotiations
broke down. The Princes probably feel that should negotiations be resumed
in the event of the great political parties in British India showing a
more responsive attitude, the Cripps declaration would certainly from the
starting point of such negotiations and would be regarded as the minimum
measure of concession and advance open to discussion.
-
In particular, preplexity is expressed
in pare II (a) of the Chancellor's letter with regard to the statement
made by the Lord Privy Seal in the house of commons to the effect that
he was "certain that this House would wish the British Administration in
India to do all it can to encourage and expedite the development of suitable
representative institutions in all Indian States." It is impossible to
reconcile this statement with the earlier declaration of policy of His
Majesty's Government made m the form of replies to questions asked in Parliament
in 1938, and referred to in His Excellency the Crown Representatives address
to the Chamber of Princes in 1939. On the first occasion, on n I st February
1938, the Under Secretary of State replied that "It is not the policy of
the Paramount Power in ordinary circumstances to intervene ii, the internal
administration of full powered States." This was confirmed on the 16th
December of the same year when the reply given to Sir John Wardlaw-Milne
was that "His Majesty's Government have no intention of bringing any form
of pressure to bear upon Rulers to initiate constitutional changes. It
rests with the Rulers themselves to decide what form of Government they
should adopt in the diverse conditions of Indian States".
-
There thus exists a direct discrepancy
in a matter of cardinal importance, which, in His Excellency's opinion,
requires elucidation at the earliest possible opportunity, since, if the
view expressed by the Lord Privy Seal is to be interpreted as the considered
view of His Majesty's Government as now constituted, our existing policy
in regard to constitutional reforms in States stands in need of radical
revision.
-
I am also to invite particular attention
to paragraph III (d) of the Chancellor's letter which contains a brief
and surprisingly restrained reference to what is perhaps the most legitimate
of all the objections which the Princes could raise to the draft declaration,
namely, that by acceding to the new Union they would be committed to a
possible...perhaps even probable severance of their cherished relations
with the British Crown. His Highness has not mentioned the obvious remedy,
i. e. that in joining the, Union, the States should be allowed to reserve
the right to secede from it if at any time the Union were to decide to
leave the British Commonwealth of Nations. His Excellency believes that,
in the absence of such a provision, few if any, of the great States would
join the Union.
In conclusion I am to make it clear
that His Excellency is strongly of opinion that so fully documented a communication,
emanating from such a source and couched in terms of genuiine apprehension
clearly calls for a definite answer, the nature of which can only be determined
by His Majesty's Government. |