Montagu, Haig & Linlithgow

Colonial Administrators in India, 1914-1947

The British had claimed defence of national freedoms as their reason for fighting in WW1. It appeared hypocritical of them to not give some degree of home-rule to India after this.

Edwin Montagu

In 1919, when Montagu was the Secretary of State for India, parliament passed the India Act from Westminster.
The act created a 'diarchy' in India where power was split (unevenly) between Indian and British political bodies. This involved:
- De-centralised administration of some Indian people (giving more power to the provinces).
- Implementing quotas for Indian people in some parts of government.
- The enfranchisement of some Indian people (wealthy and educated) who could elect Indian representatives.
Overall though, the effects did not come close to meeting the hopes of the Indian nationalists.

Lord Linlithgow

From 1935 to 1943, Lord Linlithgow served as the Viceroy of India.
Linlithgow actively promoted the enfranchisement of more Indians in the Government of India Act of 1935.
- This act granted more power to the provinces than the 1919 act, ending the 'diarchy' established by Montagu.
- It also enfranchised more than 35 million Indians, meaning 3x more people could now vote in elections.
- He believed that piecemeal reform would weaken the nationalist movement and quiet its most vocal members.

Lord Linlithgow and the independence movement

However, Linlithgow's attempts to create unity through reform backfired and ended up having the opposite effect.
The Congress Party and the Muslim League rejected his proposals for reform in 1940, which did not go far enough in their eyes.
This prompted the rise of Indian civil disobedience campaigning which Linlithgow then suppressed with vigour.
- Tens of thousands of Indians were imprisoned for acts of civil disobedience.
- Litlingow took measures to restrict the INC's ability to organise campaigns by monitoring members and censoring the press.

The Quit India Movement

Indians blamed Linlithgow for division and a lack of economic development.
Historians argue that Linlithgow's reactionary and repressive approach to the INC and their campaigning hastened the collapse of the British Raj.

1High Water Mark of the British Empire, 1857-1914

1.1Development of Imperialism, 1857-1890

1.1.1Empires over Time

1.1.2Key Questions About Empires

1.1.3Expansion into Africa

1.1.4History of Egypt

1.1.5Control of Egypt

1.1.6Control of Sudan

1.2Imperial & Colonial Policy, 1857-1890

1.2.1The British Empire & India

1.2.2The British Raj

1.2.3International Relations with other Powers

1.2.4Scramble for Africa

1.2.5The Informal Empire

1.3Trade & Commerce, 1857-1890

1.3.1Trade & Commerce in the Empire

1.3.2Infrastructure of Trade & Commerce

1.3.3Products of Trade & Commerce

1.4Attitudes Towards the Empire, 1857-1890

1.4.1Explorers

1.4.2Missionaries

1.4.3Traders & Colonial Administrators

1.4.4Government Attitudes Towards Imperialism

1.5Relations with Indigenous Peoples, 1857-1890

1.5.1Relations with India

1.5.2Relations with South Africa

1.5.3British-Boer Relations

2Imperial Consolidation & Liberal Rule, 1890-1914

2.1Consolidation & Expansion in Africa, 1890-1914

2.1.1Consolidation & Expansion into Africa

2.1.2Consolidation & Expansion in South Africa

2.1.3Historical Interpretations: Expansion into Africa

2.2Imperial & Colonial Policy, 1890-1914

2.2.1Policy in India

2.2.2Policy in Egypt

2.2.3Native Policy in Colonies

2.2.4International Relations with Other Powers

2.3Trade & Commerce, 1890-1914

2.3.1The Benefits of Trade

2.3.2Costs of the Empire

2.3.3Debates Over Trade

2.4Attitudes Towards the Empire, 1890-1914

2.4.1Key Administrators - Chamberlain & Rhodes

2.4.2Key Administrators - Baring & Milner

2.4.3Key Administrators - Curzon

2.4.4Government Attitudes to the Empire

2.4.5National Efficiency & the Boer War

2.4.6Popular Attitudes Towards Imperialism

2.5Relations with Indigenous Peoples, 1890-1914

2.5.1Challenges in India

2.5.2Challenges in Africa

2.5.3Challenges in South Africa

2.5.4Historical Interpretations of the Boer War

2.5.5Relations & Business with Iran

3Imperialism Challenged, 1914-1967

3.1Expansion & Contraction of Empire, 1914-1947

3.1.1Impact of WW1

3.1.2Palestine

3.1.3Ireland & WW1

3.1.4Impact of WW2 on the British Empire

3.2Colonial Policy & Administration, 1914-1947

3.2.1Administration in India & Palestine

3.2.2Administration in Iraq & the Dominions

3.2.3Imperial Defence

3.3Trade, Commerce & Economic Impact of War

3.3.1Economic Impact of WW1

3.3.2Inter-War Trade & Commerce

3.3.3Economic Impact of WW2

3.4Attitudes Towards the Empire, 1890-1914

3.4.1Colonial Administrators

3.4.2Trusteeship

3.4.3Gandhi

3.4.4Montagu, Haig & Linlithgow

3.4.5Cameron, Mitchell, Cohen & Furse - African Admins

3.4.6Imperialist Ideals

3.5Relations with Indigenous Peoples, 1914-1947

3.5.1Ireland & India 1914-1947

3.5.2The Middle East and Africa

4The Wind of Change, 1947-1967

4.1Decolonisation in Africa & Asia, 1947-1967

4.1.1Reasons for Decolonisation

4.1.2Decolonisation in East & West Africa

4.1.3Decolonisation in Central & South Africa

4.1.4Decolonisation in Asia

4.2Colonial Policy & Administration, 1947-1967

4.2.1Relations & Business with Iran after WW2

4.2.2The 'Winds of Change'

4.2.3The Suez Canal Crisis - 1956

4.2.4International Relations 1947-1967

4.3Trade & Commerce, 1947-1967

4.3.1The Economic Impact of WW2

4.4Attitudes Towards the Empire, 1947-1967

4.4.1Colonial Administrators: Cohen & Arden-Clarke

4.4.2Local Leaders in the Independence Movement

4.4.3Pan-Africanism in Nationalism

4.5Post-Colonial Ties, 1947-1967

4.5.1Windrush & Immigration

4.5.2Commonwealth Immigrants Act

4.5.3Residual Impact of the Empire

4.6Relations with Indigenous Peoples, 1947-1967

4.6.1Challenges to Colonial Rule Post 1947

4.6.2Kenya & the Mau Mau Uprising

4.6.3Nigeria & Rhodesia

Jump to other topics