Moderates, Extremists

 

Subject: Moderates, Extremists & Councils Acts (1861, 1892) - Honey GIS Classes

I. Introduction & Exam Focus

• Topic: Problems of Moderates & Extremists; Councils Acts of 1861 & 1892.

• Exam Relevance:

  • Minor exams: Often ask for names of Moderate/Extremist leaders.

  • Detailed exams: Ask about Moderate purpose, methods, successes/failures; details of Councils Acts.

II. Leaders Mentioned

• General Moderate Leaders: Dadabhai Naoroji, Pherozeshah Mehta, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Tyabji, Dinshaw Wacha.

• Leaders Associated with Proposing Swarajya (within the Moderates listed): Dadabhai Naoroji, Pherozeshah Mehta, R. C. Dutt, Dinshaw Wacha.

  • (Note: Extremist leaders are mentioned as a category but specific names aren't listed in this section of the transcript)

III. Councils Acts: Background & Features

• General Point: All Councils Acts (1861, 1892, 1909) have specific political backdrops (Reference: Lakshmikanth book).

• Pre-Act Context (British Policy 1773-1858):

  • Gradual removal of British monopoly.

  • Deliberate policy to keep Indians out of the decision-making process.

  • Indian insistence on representation arose as a reaction to this exclusion.

• Context: 1853 Act:

  • Mentioned Governor-General's Executive Council (4 members, no Indians).

  • Called the "first mini-parliament".

• Councils Act of 1861:

  • Political Backdrop: Revolt of 1857 (Sepoy Mutiny).

  • Reason: British realization that governing without Indian representatives was difficult post-revolt; response to Indian insistence on representation.

• Councils Act of 1892:

  • Political Backdrop:

    • Formation of Indian National Congress (INC) in 1885. (Dinshaw Wacha mentioned as chairperson of the first meeting).

    • Initial British reaction to INC (first 2-3 years): Lenient, apprehensive, no significant opposition.

    • Later (c. 1889-90): Indians (via INC) started making voices heard, asking questions.

  • Purpose: To appease Indians and make some concessions due to growing demands.

  • Features Mentioned: Allowed Indian participation and the ability to question officials.

  • British Attitude (Concurrent):

    • Formed a committee to hear grievances post-INC formation.

    • Still believed British rule was necessary.

    • Did not agree Indians should have administrative roles; considered Indians unqualified.

• Councils Act of 1909 (Minto-Morley Reforms):

  • Political Backdrop: Partition of Bengal (Process 1903, Event 16 Oct 1905).

  • Reason: British realization (post-partition) that "divide and rule" could work, specifically to divide Muslims.

  • Key Feature: Created a special/separate electorate for Muslims.

IV. Partition of Bengal (1905)

• Initiator: Lord Curzon.

• Recommendation: Based on Risley's comments, first suggested by William Wodehouse.

• Risley's Rationale: Believed a united Bengal was strong ("as strong as an empire"); partitioning it would weaken Indian nationalism.

• Strategy Employed: "Divide and Rule".

• INC Role: Played no part until after the partition was enacted.

V. Demands Raised by Indians (Moderates)

• Administrative/ICS Reforms (Elphinstone's comments highlighted):

  • Critique of ICS Exam: Unfair - required Greek/Latin, held only in London.

  • Demands:

    • Conduct exam simultaneously in India.

    • Increase the minimum age limit (as young Indians struggled to clear).

  • Outcome Mentioned: Demands eventually became law in 1919.

• Economic Demands:

  • Reduce taxes on staples (e.g., salt).

  • Encourage domestic industries.

  • Boycott foreign goods.

• Proponents of Economic Demands: Dadabhai Naoroji, R. C. Dutt, Dinshaw Wacha.

VI. Miscellaneous Points

• British policy evolved from keeping Indians out (pre-1858) to limited inclusion (post-1861) due to pressure and events.

• The transcript repeatedly emphasizes the political context behind each legislative act.