The two contrasting reports

IT is perfectly obvious that while the country has, with almost one voice, condemned the majority report of the Muddiman Committee as inadequate, unsatisfactory and unacceptable, the minority report has, on the whole, been well received both by the Press and by the public. The reason is not far to seek. At a time when the country has been crying for nothing less and nothing else than the bread of political liberty and self-fulfilment, what the precious majority in this case, consisting of three Europeans and two Indian back-numbers, offer to the people is nothing but the stone of small reforms which are proverbially the enemy of big reforms, coupled with certain suggestions of a positively retrograde character. It is, indeed, the barest truth to say that from first to last the majority report is permeated by two obvious desires. One is to safeguard the position of the Services and the other is to make the working of the government machinery more smooth. The people do not want either. They want the Services to be definitely subordinated to the people and their representatives, and they know only too well that the smooth working of a Constitution, in which all real power is still vested in an irresponsible Government, is the very worst thing that can happen to a country which is struggling for liberty. Paradoxical as it may sound to those who look upon the preamble to the Government of India Act as the last word of political wisdom, the plain truth must be told that it is not by its success but by its failure that a transitional Constitution such as we have in India at present can pave the way to a better and more permanent Constitution.