The Government of India Act 1919: Dyarchy in the Provinces

Sections 2 to 5: the words, the provinces, and the ministers

Section 2(1) supplies the vocabulary, and it is worth quoting because students routinely invent a fourth category that does not exist. The expressions central subjects and provincial subjects mean subjects so classified under the rules; and provincial subjects other than transferred subjects are referred to in the Act as reserved subjects.

So there are three names and not four. Every subject is central or provincial; every provincial subject is transferred or reserved; and "reserved" is simply the residue of the provincial list after the transferred subjects have been taken out of it. Section 2 also allows rules about the conditions on which loans may be raised on the security of allocated revenues, which is what makes provincial finance a real thing rather than a bookkeeping entry.

Section 3(1) names the provinces the system applied to. The presidencies of Fort William in Bengal, Fort St George and Bombay, and the provinces of the United Provinces, the Punjab, Bihar and Orissa, the Central Provinces and Assam, were each to be governed in relation to reserved subjects by a governor in council, and in relation to transferred subjects by the governor acting with ministers appointed under the Act. Those eight are the governor's provinces, and the expression is used throughout the Act. By section 3(2) the provisions of the principal Act about presidency governments were applied to the five newer provinces, with the proviso that their governors were to be appointed after consultation with the Governor-General.

That single sentence in section 3(1) is the statutory definition of dyarchy, and a student who can reproduce it has the answer.

Section 4 is the ministers.

• 4(1): the governor may by notification appoint ministers, not being members of his executive council or other officials, to administer transferred subjects, and they hold office during his pleasure. Their salary is the same as an executive councillor's unless a smaller salary is provided by vote of the legislative council, which gave the council a lever.
• 4(2): no minister shall hold office for longer than six months unless he is or becomes an elected member of the local legislature. This is the provision that ties the minister to the elected chamber, and it is the nearest thing in the Act to responsible government.
• 4(3): in relation to transferred subjects the governor shall be guided by the advice of his ministers, unless he sees sufficient cause to dissent from their opinion, in which case he may require action to be taken otherwise than in accordance with that advice.
• 4(4): the governor may appoint council secretaries from among the non-official members of the legislative council to assist executive councillors and ministers.

Read 4(3) carefully, because it is the hinge of the whole scheme and it cuts both ways. The Governor was guided by his ministers on transferred subjects, which is real and was new. But he could dissent for sufficient cause, and he was the judge of what was sufficient. Dyarchy gave ministers an advisory supremacy that the Governor could override, not a power he could not touch.

Section 5 reduces from two to one the number of members of a provincial executive council who must have served twelve years under the Crown in India, and ends the Commander-in-chief's membership of the councils at Calcutta, Madras and Bombay. The first half of that made room for an Indian on the executive council of a province, on the reserved side.

Section 6: keeping the two halves apart on paper

Section 6(1) requires that all orders and proceedings of the government of a governor's province be expressed to be made by the government of the province and authenticated as the Governor directs, provided that rules shall distinguish orders and proceedings relating to transferred subjects from other orders and proceedings; and that an order so authenticated shall not be called in question in any legal proceeding on the ground that it was not duly made.

Section 6(2) allows the Governor to make rules and orders for the more convenient transaction of business in his executive council and with his ministers, and any order made in accordance with them is treated as the order or act of the government of the province.

Read those together and the practical difficulty of dyarchy is already visible in the drafting. The province acts as one government; its orders are one government's orders; and yet every order must be classifiable as belonging to one half or the other, because responsibility differs between them.

Sections 7 to 9: the provincial legislature

Section 7(1): there shall be a legislative council in every governor's province, consisting of the members of the executive council and of members nominated or elected as provided by the Act. The rules gave the elected members a substantial majority.

Section 8(1): every governor's legislative council shall continue for three years from its first meeting, subject to the provisos.

Section 9(1): there shall be a President of a governor's legislative council, who until the expiration of four years from the first meeting shall be a person appointed by the Governor, and thereafter elected by the council subject to approval. That is section 20 for the provinces.

Section 14: an official shall not be qualified for election to a local legislative council, and a non-official member who accepts office in the service of the Crown vacates his seat.

Section 10: the legislative power

10(1): the local legislature of any province has power, subject to the provisions of this Act, to make laws for the peace and good government of the territories constituting the province.

10(2): it may repeal or alter as to that province any law made before or after the Act by any authority in British India other than that local legislature. That is section 5 of the Indian Councils Act 1892, generalised.

10(3): it may not, without the previous sanction of the Governor-General, make or take into consideration any law of the classes the subsection lists.

The pattern of a reserved list requiring previous sanction, which began in section 43 of the Act of 1861, survives.

Section 11: the budget in a province

11(1) removes the old restrictions on the classes of business a local legislative council might transact.

11(2) is the important provision: the estimated annual expenditure and revenue of the province shall be laid before the council each year, and the local government's proposals for appropriation shall be submitted to the vote of the council in the form of demands for grants. The council may assent, or refuse its assent, to a demand, or may reduce the amount, either by reducing the whole grant or by omitting or reducing items.

Compare that with the centre, where the same technique was used, and with 1892, where the councils could only discuss the financial statement. A provincial council in 1921 could refuse a grant, and its refusal had effect subject to the Governor's powers.

Sections 12 and 13: assent, reservation and certification

Section 12 gives the Governor, instead of assenting or withholding assent, power to return a Bill for reconsideration with recommended amendments, or, in cases prescribed by rules, to reserve the Bill for the consideration of the Governor-General, with provisions for what follows a reservation.

Section 13(1) is the provincial certification power, and it is narrower than the Governor-General's under section 27 in a way that shows exactly how dyarchy worked.

Where a governor's legislative council has refused leave to introduce, or has failed to pass in a form recommended by the governor, any Bill relating to a reserved subject, the governor may certify that the passage of the Bill is essential for the discharge of his responsibility for the subject, and the Bill is then deemed to have passed and becomes an Act of the local legislature on his signature.

Section 13(2): every such Act is expressed to be made by the governor, who must send an authentic copy to the Governor-General, who reserves it for the signification of His Majesty's pleasure.

Notice the words "relating to a reserved subject" and "his responsibility for the subject". The Governor could not certify a Bill about a transferred subject, because he was not responsible for those: the ministers were. The certification power is the mirror image of the transfer, and it shows that dyarchy was a real division and not a form of words.

Sections 15 and 16 deal with the creation of new provinces after obtaining an expression of opinion from the local government and legislature, with the sanction of His Majesty previously signified, and with the validity of orders made after the commencement of the Act.

A worked example

The Bombay Legislative Council in 1924.

A Bill about primary education. Education is a transferred subject. The minister in charge is an elected member; he introduces the Bill; if the council rejects it, that is the end of it, because the Governor cannot certify a Bill on a transferred subject.

A Bill about the police. The police is a reserved subject. The member of the executive council in charge introduces it; if the council refuses leave or amends it against the Governor's recommendation, the Governor may certify under section 13 that its passage is essential for the discharge of his responsibility, and it becomes an Act.

A demand for a grant for the education department. Votable: the council may assent, refuse or reduce it under section 11(2), and a refusal bites, because the minister must then govern without the money.

A demand for a grant for the police. Also submitted to the vote, and here the difficulty of dyarchy appears: a council that disliked the reserved half could refuse its supply, and the Governor's power to restore was the answer. The friction that produced is the standing criticism of the system.

What beginners get wrong

"Dyarchy divided power between the centre and the provinces." That is devolution, and it is step two. Dyarchy is the division of the provincial subjects into transferred and reserved within one province.

"Ministers were responsible to the legislature." They were appointed by and held office during the pleasure of the Governor, and were chosen from the elected members. Their position depended in practice on the council's support, but the Act did not make them removable by it.

"The Governor could certify any Bill." Only a Bill relating to a reserved subject, and only on certifying that its passage was essential for the discharge of his responsibility for that subject.

"Dyarchy was introduced at the centre as well." It was introduced in the governors' provinces. The centre had two chambers with elected majorities and an executive that was not responsible at all.

Limits and criticism

Dyarchy failed, and it is worth being precise about why, because "it failed" is not an answer.

The division of subjects was artificial. Education was transferred and the police reserved; agriculture was transferred and land revenue reserved; public health was transferred and irrigation reserved. Almost every practical problem crossed the line, and a minister could not act without the reserved half's cooperation.

The money was on the wrong side. The revenue-raising subjects were largely reserved, and the spending subjects largely transferred, so a minister with responsibility for education depended on a colleague he did not choose for the funds to discharge it.

The Governor was in both halves. He presided over the executive council and acted with the ministers, and the same officer had to be the responsible head of one half and the constitutional head of the other.

And the certification power in section 13 preserved the Governor's control where it mattered most, on the reserved subjects that included justice, the police and the land revenue.

What dyarchy achieved, and it is not nothing, is that from 1921 Indians held ministerial office and administered departments in the provinces, and the provincial councils voted on demands for grants. The Act of 1935 abolished dyarchy in the provinces and gave them provincial autonomy, and it moved dyarchy to the centre, where it never came into effect because the federation never came into being. That is the next chapter.

Quick revision

• Dyarchy: within a governor's province, provincial subjects divided into transferred, administered by the Governor with ministers chosen from the elected members, and reserved, administered by the Governor in his executive council.
• s.1: rules for classifying subjects as central and provincial, and for the devolution of authority and revenues to local governments.
• s.2: central and provincial subjects are those so classified by the rules; reserved subjects are provincial subjects other than transferred subjects. Loans on the security of allocated revenues.
• s.3: names the eight governor's provinces and states the formula: reserved subjects by the governor in council, transferred subjects by the governor acting with ministers.
• s.4: ministers appointed by notification, not officials, holding office during the governor's pleasure; six months unless an elected member; the governor guided by their advice unless he sees sufficient cause to dissent; council secretaries.
• s.5: one member of a provincial executive council, not two, need have twelve years' service; the Commander-in-chief ceases to be a member.
• s.6: orders of the province to be authenticated, with rules distinguishing transferred from other business; rules for the transaction of business with the executive council and with ministers.
• s.7: a legislative council in every governor's province. s.8: three years. s.9: a President, appointed for four years then elected. s.14: officials not eligible for election.
• s.10: power to make laws for the peace and good government of the province; power to repeal or alter any law made by any other authority in British India as to that province; previous sanction of the Governor-General for the listed classes.
• s.11: the annual statement laid before the council; appropriation proposals submitted to the vote as demands for grants, which the council may assent to, refuse or reduce.
• s.12: the Governor may return a Bill or reserve it for the Governor-General. s.13: certification of a Bill relating to a reserved subject as essential for the discharge of his responsibility, whereupon it becomes an Act on his signature and is reserved for His Majesty's pleasure.

Test yourself

1. Explain dyarchy in three steps. Rules classified subjects as central and provincial; authority over provincial subjects and the revenues to support them was devolved to local governments; and provincial subjects were further classified as transferred, administered by the Governor with ministers chosen from the elected members of the council, and reserved, administered by the Governor in his executive council.

2. What is the limit on the Governor's certification power, and why is it significant? He could certify only a Bill relating to a reserved subject, and only that its passage was essential for the discharge of his responsibility for that subject. It is significant because it shows that the transfer of subjects was real: on a transferred subject the council's refusal was final.

3. What power over money did a provincial council acquire? The estimated annual expenditure and revenue were laid before it, and the local government's appropriation proposals were submitted to its vote as demands for grants, which it could assent to, refuse, or reduce either wholly or by omitting or reducing items.

4. Give three reasons dyarchy failed. The division of subjects was artificial, so that almost every practical problem crossed the line between transferred and reserved; the revenue-raising subjects were largely reserved while the spending subjects were largely transferred, so ministers depended on colleagues they did not choose; and the Governor was head of both halves, being responsible for one and constitutional head of the other.

5. What did dyarchy achieve? From 1921 Indians held ministerial office and administered departments in the provinces, and the provincial councils, with elected majorities, voted on demands for grants. Both were new.

6. What was a minister's position under section 4, and how close was it to responsible government? He was appointed by the governor by notification, could not be a member of the executive council or an official, held office during the governor's pleasure, and could not hold office for more than six months unless he was or became an elected member of the local legislature. On transferred subjects the governor was to be guided by his advice unless the governor saw sufficient cause to dissent. That is close to responsible government in the sense that the minister had to be an elected member and had a real voice, and far from it in the sense that he was removable by the governor and could be overruled by him.