Indian Councils Act of 1909, commonly known as the Morley-Minto Reforms, began when John Morley, the Liberal Secretary of State for India, and the Conservative Governor-General of India, The Earl of Minto, believed that cracking down on terrorism in Bengal was necessary but not sufficient for restoring stability to the British Raj after Lord Curzon's partitioning of Bengal. John Morley 1st Viscount Morley of Blackburn, OM, PC (24 December 1838 – 23 September 1923 was a British Liberal Statesman The office of Secretary of State for India or India Secretary was created in 1858 when Company rule in India ended and India was brought under direct British rule The Governor-General of India (or from 1858 to 1947 the Viceroy and Governor-General of India) was the head of the British administration in India, and Gilbert John Elliot-Murray-Kynynmound 4th Earl of Minto, KG, GCSI, GCMG, GCIE, PC ( London July 9, 1845 Etymology and ethnology The exact origin of the word Bangla or Bengal is unknown though it is believed to be derived from the Dravidian-speaking tribe Bang For usage see British rule in India British Raj ( rāj, lit "reign" in Hindustani) primarily refers to the British George Nathaniel Curzon 1st Marquess Curzon of Kedleston, KG, GCSI, GCIE, PC ( 11 January 1859 &ndash 20 March They believed that a dramatic step was required to put heart into loyal elements of the Indian upper classes and the growing Westernised section of the population.
They produced the Indian Councils Act of 1909 (Morley-Minto reforms), these reforms did not go any significant distance toward meeting the Indian National Congress demand for 'the system of government obtaining in Self-Governing British Colonies'. Indian National Congress-I (also known as the Congress Party and abbreviated INC) is a major Political party in India.
The Act of 1909 was important for the following:
“To Lord Curzon's apprehension that the new Councils could become 'parliamentary bodies in miniature', Morley vehemently replied that, 'if it could be said that this chapter of reforms led directly or indirectly to the establishment of a parliamentary system in India, I for one would have nothing at all to do with it'. But he had already confessed in a letter to Minto in June 1906 that while it was inconceivable to adapt English political institutions to the 'nations who inhabit India. . . the spirit of English institutions is a different thing and it is a thing that we cannot escape, even if we wished. . . because the British constituencies are the masters, and they will assuredly insist. . . all parties alike. . . on the spirit of their own political system being applied to India. ' He never got down to explaining how the spirit of the British system of government could be achieved without its body. ”
These concessions were a constant source of strife 1909-47. British statesmen generally considered reserved seats as regrettable in that they encouraged communal extremism as Muslim candidates did not have to appeal for Hindu votes and vice versa. As further power was shifted from the British to Indian politicians in 1919, 1935 and after, Muslims were ever more determined to hold on to, and if possible expand, reserved seats and their weightage. However, Hindu politicians repeatedly tried to eliminate reserved seats as they considered them to be undemocratic and to hinder the development of a shared Hindu-Muslim Indian national feeling.