Lord Chelmsford’s speech

WE have said that it was unfortunate that it should have been left to such a man as Lord Chelmsford to befriend the cause of India in the recent debate in the House of Lords, in which so many ex-Indian views and sympathies took part, and in which sentiments of a most pernicious character were expressed. Even a cursory examination of the ex-Viceroy’s speech will suffice to show how ill-fitted he was for the task thus entrusted to him. There was not in the whole speech a word of rebuke to either Lord Inchcape or Lord Harris or Lord Ampthill for the views expressed by them on the question of Indian self-government, views which, Lord Chelmsford could not but be aware, would, if left unchallenged, do great mischief in India. Nor was Lord Curzon’s equally provocative reference to Lord Olivier’s recent speech in which he had asked the House to take a common sense view of Mr Das’ attitude in the matter of the Saha resolution handled with anything like the strength and earnestness which were imperatively demand. If anything, Lord Chelmsford was clearly apologetic. “I wished it was sufficiently realised,” he said, “how difficult it is at this distance from India to form a sound judgment on some problems like those raised by the utterances of Mr Das which had been so often quoted in that House. Lord Peel might form one inference from the facts before him and Lord Olivier form another from what was before him.” This was not facing but fighting shy of the real issue. Distance had nothing to do with the matter; nor was the question merely of different persons drawing different inferences from the facts before them.

Advertisement