were of a character specially to qualify him to take his place in an assembly of statesmen like those who composed the Imperial War Conference and the Peace Conference. His ability to see the various sides of a question, his breadth of view, his grasp of facts and masterly presentment, his tact and his moderation and self-restraint were bound to make an impression in an assembly charged with the duty of considering the intricate and momentous problems which arose out of the situation created by the war. The exercise of moderation is sometimes attributed to a lack of force of conviction or want of grit, but this was not the case with Lord Sinha. It was an open secret at the time when the Press Act was passed in 1910 that it was the result of his threat of resignation that the Government introduced the provision for a reference to the High Court. His strenuous efforts at the Peace Conference to save the Turkish Empire from dismemberment won the admiration of a Muslim leader like His Highness the Aga Khan. The change in the angle of vision of colonial premiers in regard to the treatment of Indians settled in the colonies is largely due to the manner in which the subject was presented and pressed upon the attention of the War Conference by Lord Sinha. In the Joint Committee on the Indian Reform Bill which has just concluded the taking of evidence, Lord Sinha has devoted himself to his task with untiring devotion and has from all accounts been rendering inestimable service. On the question of Constitutional Reform, Industrial development of the country and the need for nationalising the army Lord Sinha's views are quite sound and in accordance with the trend of sober political thought in this country. He has a firm faith in the value of the British connection to India and in the possibility of achieving our political salvation under the aegis of Britain. A NEW STATUS FOR INDIA By Mr. H. S. L. POLAK. IN the course of the inaugural address delivered by him to the Oxford Summer School, on August 1, Lord Milner said :— "In some quarters a fear has been expressed that the position of the great Dominions and India as independent members of the League of Nations side by side with the British Empire will lead to the disruption of the tie between the United Kingdom and the Dominions. I do not share that fear, though I admit that it is not wholly groundless. But I do not think that, in truth, the unity of the Commonwealth is threatened by the fact that the British Empire and the Dominions and India appear among the signatories of the Covenant of the League as separate though related States. For, the Dominions are not appendices of the 'British Empire, but integral parts of it. I am certain that anything like dissension between different British States in the councils of the League would be so overwhelmingly condemned by public opinion in all of them that it should be an easy task for statesmanship to avoid it." There is a great deal more of interest and value in Lord Milner's address, but it is not immediately pertinent. Let us, therefore, turn to the language of General Smuts, the South African Premier, in the Aora of Assembly, on September 10: "Until last year British Ministers had signed all documents and dealt with all matters affecting the Dominions. A change had come at Paris, when the Dominion representatives had, on behalf of the King, for the first time signed that great document (i.e., the Peace Treaty). The change was that in future the representatives of the Dominions would act for the Mr. Powell, the eminent statesman who was a prominent member of the Canadian group of the British Peace Delegation at Paris, used similar language when commending the Peace Treaty to the Canadian Parliament. What does all this mean to India? Let us take a concrete example. To begin with, India has been given great Dominion rank in the Imperial Conference, and her representatives have taken their seats in the Imperial War Cabinet. As a territorial until of the Empire-I say nothing here of internal political conditions-she has been granted a status of complete equality with the great Dominions of the Empire. She has, too, now, for the first time in modern history, received independent international recognition. She was a separate signatory of the Peace Treaty, and as Mr. Surendranath Bannerjea remarked, the other day, at the deputation that waited upon Mr. Montagu on the South African Indian question; she is also an original member of the League of Nations. Thus, whatever status and privileges any one of the Dominions does or may enjoy, in principle that status and those privileges are enjoyed or enjoyable by India. I think we are all agreed, with Lord Milner, that internal dissension between the separate and equal members of the British Imperial Confederations, before the League of Nations, are in the highest degree undesirable. Yet it may so happen that they are hardly avoidable or, if avoidable, only because of the fact of the existence of the League of Nations and the sense of shame that would overcome us all to be compelled to wash our Imperial dirty linen in public. Take the South African trouble. The legislation that is causing us so much anxiety is aimed not only at Indians but at all Asiatics. It is entitled the "Asiatics Trading and Land Act." It operates against foreign subjects from Japan equally with British subjects from India. Whilst all kinds of compromises may be conceivable within a common Empire, some of them are highly improbable in the case of even so loyal ally as Japan, who might very well regard herself as justified in appealing for redress to the League in terms of Article XI of the Covenant of the League of Nations. It was this very Article, however, that President Wilson had in mind when answering his interlocutors on the subject of Ireland. And it is persumably to that Article that Mr. J. X. Merriman, the South African statesman, recently referred when he warned the assembly that, with India as an equal member of the League, South African Indians would be able, if they believed themselves to be subject to disabilities and suffering under grievances, to appeal to the Council of the League for redress, The second part of Article XI reads as follows: "It is also declared to be the friendly right of each member of the League to bring to the attention of the Assembly or of the Council any circumstances whatever affecting international relations which threaten to disturb international peace or the good understanding between nations upon which peace depends." As the Times points out: "For many years Imperial practice has far outstripped Imperial theory; the Dominions have had complete self-government, and legislation by the Imperial Parliament for the Dominions has been limited to passing without amendment measures framed in every detail by the Dominions themselves. So far as this goes, the war has but confirmed the existing practice, though even here the theory of the Imperial system is far behind the facts. In theory, for example, the Imperial Government can still veto Dominion Legislation, and in theory the Act which embodies the Constitutions of Canada could still be amended by the Imperial Parliament without any reference whatever to the will of the Canadian people expressed through the Canadian Parliament. But in fact these are obsolete contingencies, so completely overruled by the practice of Imperial relations that nobody pays any attention to them." It is as well not to close our eyes to facts, and Mr. Montagu was within his legitimate sphere in poking fun at a deputation, almost all of whose members were here on a mission affecting intimately the problem of reponsible self-government for India, when they offered him the suggestion that the Imperial Government should veto the obnoxious South African Act. Seeing, therefore, that it is no longer possible to use a former means of coercion, what are the remaining alternatives, and have any new weapons of defence been added to India's armoury? There is, first, the possibility of direct relations with South Africa, either by means of a special mission or by a permanent semi-consular agency. Next, there is the diplomatic action of the Imperial Government behind the scenes. Thirdly, there is the influence and pressure that can be brought to bear within the Imperial Conference, of which India is now an equal member, upon the basis of the public declarations of South African Ministers, to which reference was made Mr. Montagu the other day in reply to the deputation. Here, the goodwill and sense of fair-play of the other Dominions, where the problem is far less acute and who have already given tokens of a wider statesmanship, may well be appealed to by India, who can really put up a very good case. Finally, there is the Council of the League of Nations and the Assembly of the League, in the last resort. It is, to me, inconceivable that it will ever be necessary to proceed to that last Court of Appeal. by There is yet another category of cases in which India, as an original member of the League, is interested. Take the instance of British East Africa. Here, though Indians are, in many important respects, the commercial back-bone of the country which they helped to develop for centuries before a British white man set his foot there, an attempt is being made to reduce them to the same ignoble status as that of their compatriots in South Africa. Yet British East Africa is not a self-governing Dominion but a territory with the status of a Crown Colony. It is the Imperial Government, in this case, with whom India's quarrel lies. What now of the adjacent THE INDIAN REVIEW. ex-German Colony? In all likelihood it will be delivered over to Great Britain under mandate, to be administered on behalf of the League of Nations, which is very unlikely to accede or to approve methods of administration of a differential character. If the mandatory power sought to do so, India would have an indefeasable right to appeal to the League for redress of her national grievances. If, on the contrary, generous and equitable treatment were given, the Indians in [OCTOBER 1919 the neighbouring British Colony would be justified in appealing, first, to Britain for redress, and, if unsuccessful, to public opinion through the League. It may take time to work out all the possibililities and implications of India's new status; but it is there, it is certain, it is enjoyable, and it should be enjoyed and prove fruitful of much advantage to India as one of the great international factors in the world-civilisation of the future. The Calcutta University Commission Report BY MISS MCDOUGALL, M.A. Principal of the Women's Christian College, Madras. SI have recently been appointed a member of a committee of the Senate whose reference is "to consider and report upon the changes desirable in the University Acts and in the Regulations in view of the recommendations of the Calcutta University Commission," I do not think it advisable at the present moment to express an opinion about such possible changes. But I welcome the opportunity of making one or two comments on the sections of the Calcutta Report which describe the existing conditions of women's education, and particularly of Collegiate education. A very serious mistake may be made if the account of such conditions in Bengal is taken as a true picture of women's education in South India. The Report itself (vol. II. p. 4) declares that "in this respect Bengal falls far behind Bombay " and it is only fair to say that it falls still farther behind Madras. The number of girls at school is greater in South India than in Bengal, the number of schools is greater, and the courses prescribed for them are more suitable. I do not think that the objection made to the Matriculation Examination in Bengal can justly be levelled against the Secondary School Leaving Examination in South India, though I personally should be inclined to modify the latter in the case of girls by one far-reaching change. This is to Domestic Science" (or whatever name is given to training in household arts) a subject and thus render it a compulsory study on a level in dignity with English. The Elementary Mathematics might, I think, be safely omitted if domestic arithmetic (including bazaar accounts, rates of rent and wages, calculation of interest and so on) make was made part of the course and brought up to a high degree of efficiency. Again, the practice recommended (Vol. II. p. 21) of carrying on in the same institution school work, college work, and the training of teachers, may be necessary in Bengal, though even there, I think, it should be regarded as a temporary arrangement. In Madras, where women students are numerous, it is most desirable that they should be separated as completely as possible from school girls, and taught the responsibility and freedom of grown up students. There must of course be an intimate connection between schools and the Teachers' Training College but the Arts College should be completely detached from both. It is most undesirable to unite in the same class students with such different purposes as the Arts undergraduate and the intending teacher ought to have. The point of view suitable at the one stage is not sui table at the other. But the most serious warning must be given with regard to the section of the Report (Vol. II. p. 21) concerning the injurious effect of collegiate education on the health and physique of the women undergraduates. This passage is written with a sympathy and compassion which all women must appreciate. But it is most regrettable that the Commission did not point out that this evil state of things is by no means true of other parts of India. If it were universally true, our plain duty would be to close women's colleges and debar women from higher education, for no advantage can compensate for the injury to the health of the mothers of the next generation. But as a matter of fact the health of women students in Madras is very good. Those who are responsible for the two residential colleges agree in reporting that the general level of health and vigour is very high, and outsiders have told me that it is far better than that of women of the same age who live at home. The medical inspection made this year shows a marked improvement in the physique of those who were medically inspected on entering college last year, and it is rarely indeed that there is any serious illness. The women of South India probably start with more vigorous health than the women of Bengal, and if the resident staff of a college is numerous enough to maintain intimate relations with all the students, and is willing to live in the students' quarters and to share their times of recreation, leisure and meals, they can easily ensure regular hours of sleep and exercise, thorough ventilation, abundant and regular meals, and a healthy variety of occupation which without many rules or the feeling of compulsion lessens the temptation to excessive reading. The custom of dining with the students causes these to eat more slowly than is their habit because in any case they must wait until the lecturers have finished, and nothing is gained by speed. The Christian custom of doing no work on Sunday is of inestimable value, and this is fortunately an almost invariable custom with Indian Christians. Physical exercise is made attractive by the size of the compound and by the share which the Staff take in the games. When once a healthy public opinion on these matters has been formed, it is easy by slight, though constant, pressure to keep up the custom of daily exercise as a matter of course. It has been interesting to observe how in the four years of the existence of this college the dread of the public examinations has grown to be less and less of a nervous strain. It was difficult at first to promote calmness and self-control as the time of the ordeal drew nearer. But though much fear is still felt, the interest and variety of daily life has rendered it less acute and less pervasive, and each generation comes up to the examination with less nervousness and fatigue than the last. Of course there are always individual exceptions, but this is observable as a general tendency. It would be a great mistake to legislate for Madras on the experience of Bengal, where conditions appear to be very different; and it is greatly to be hoped that no desire for uniformity, may impose on the South Indian women-students limitations which are doubtless desirable and necessary in the case of those who are at a stage which, we may hope, Madras has left behind. THE JOINT COMMITTEE BY MR. C. P. RAMASWAMI AIYAR. T is facilely asserted by certain sections of political thinkers that the best chance for Indian progress lies in the resignation of Mr. Montagu and the dissolution of the present Parliament. According to them, the Government of India Bill which is now the subject of consideration by the Joint Parliamentary Committee is framed on such inherently vicious lines that no good can come out of it. With the poet they would declare their longing "to shatter it all to bits and remould it nearer to their hearts' desire." I hold no brief for the ipsissima verba of the Bill but cherish, on the other hand, the conviction that in order to effectuate its purpose and its avowed object certain modifications are essential. Nevertheless, it is difficult for me to realise the psychology of the group I have adverted to especially when I reflect on the history of the Montagu-Chelmsford proposals and the many difficulties that confront India's progress including the general ignorance and apathy of the average member of Parliament face to face with many world-problems and many local troubles. To dispel this ignorance has indeed demanded. all the proselytising zeal of our few, though distinguished, friends. Many of us, recognising that the Report in the main embodied an advance over the older official thought, held that the scheme fell short of the ideals of the Report; but the numerous despatches of the Government of India professing all of them merely to bring into effect the underlying basis of the scheme demonstrated how far benevolent professions can outstrip practice. At the end of a long process of majority and minority Minutes even those who were willing to support the original scheme had to rub their eyes and ask themselves where they were and were likely to be if the Government of India and certain local governments had their way; and it was in a mood of anxious dubiety that most of the Indian politicians greeted the appointment of the Parliamentary Committee. There were those, and their number was by no means inconsiderable, who predicted that the for mation of this Committee merely meant the shelving of an inconvenient problem in an unobtrusive way and indeed prophecies have not been wanting that the whole move was manouevered for the purpose of going back upon pledges and promises. Not solely owing to my general optimism but also on a first-hand acquaintance with the workings of the Committee have I come to the conclusion that on the whole the procedure that was resorted to has been justified by its results. As I have elsewhere stated, the personnel of the Committee, composed as it is of the different elements in English politics, is such that the results of their deliberations cannot, by any unprejudiced observer, be characterised as partial. In the second place, many arguments, fears and hopes which would normally have been enshrined in private memoranda or casual conversation or sporadic speeches have been definitely put on the screen in the full light of publicity and we now know who our friends are and who our enemies and the full extent of their respective friendships and animosities. was Though there was a vague acknowledgment on all bands that the India of to-day is vitally different from the India even of the immediate past yet the most noteworthy feature of the proceedings before the Joint Committee was the definite and deliberate admission by witnesses so diverse in mental organisation as Sir James Meston, Sir Claude Hill, Sir Stanley Reed, Sir Frank Sly and Mr. Curtis that mere patch-work on existing systems will not meet the needs of the present situation which demanded a specific breaking away from the past and the inauguration of a new policy. The second feature that equally noticeable was the relegation to their proper place of many local and incidental problems which loomed very large before us such as the over-discussed question of communal representation and the nebulous imaginings of the school of thought represented by the Indo- British Association. To come to closer quarters with the actual questions in controversy, we find that in spite of the somewhat needless protestations of different political delegations of their inherent differences, the specific demands that were made by them were in general agreement inter se. One has only to compare the evidence of Mr. Surendranath Banerjea and Mr. Srinivasa Sastri, with that of Mrs. Besant and Mr. Tilak to notice with a gasp of surprise that allowing for differences in methods of expression there was no material divergence in programn e. Moreover, apart from, embroideries and lively and somewhat irrelevant passages at arms, Mr. Jinnah's demand does not differ from those of, say Mr. Sastri, and in fact his written memorandum asked for less than that of many of the so-called Moderate politicians; and, of a wonder, Mr. Patel in the course of his evidence really accepted Diarchy as a pis aller. Nextly, it will be found on an analysis of the evidence that though almost every one emphasised the imperfections of certain proposed plans such as Diarchy and the so-called Joint-Purse System yet when persons were cross-examined on the details, they did not produce any startlingly differ ent system for the transitional period. In this connection, I might repeat what I stated to an Interviewer in London: "It is always invidious to talk of the might-have-been, but if all delegations were unhampered by mandates and unmindful of small differences, a more substantial advance might be achieved than is likely. The Committee must have been puzzled as to why with so much agreement on the lines of possible and inevitable political march there were SO many secure entrenchments in separate quarters. It would be unwise to underrate the effect of statements made by those like Sir Alexandar Cardew, Mr. Welby and Sir Harry Stephen; fortified by the short-sighted utterances of partisans timorous of themselves and their future; but I strongly believe that the evidence tendered before the Joint Committee and the work done by the various delegations have served to convince responsi ble statesmen in England that such men are only and perhaps, unconsciously, endeavouring to reproduce Ireland in India. The depression produced by their testimony was however lifted by the unflinching and just appreciation of forces and tendencies demonstrated by an eminent group Englishmen comprising amongst others Lord Southborough, Lord Carmichael Sir Archdale Earle, Sir Stanley Reed and Sir Michael Sadler. of To sum up, the formation of the Joint Committee has led to the dispelling of many supersti tions on the part of people that count in England. The visit of a number of representative Indians has served to convince men in authority and the man in the street of the actual and the potential in India. There has been put on record a mass of evidence which fully justifies the modest claims that have been advanced on behalf of this country in view to the re organisation of material and moral forces now proceeding apace. guished Administrators like Sir Frank Sly have Distin |