Approach to the answer:

Understanding the question: The question talks about the Indian Council Act of 1909 and how it could not meet the aspirations of Indian Nationalists. Here we first need to highlight key features of the act, followed by dividing statement into two halves i.e., how reforms of 1909 afforded no answer (to self-government demand of Indian National Congress) and how reforms of 1909 could afford no answer to Indian problems (British unwillingness to part authority).

Introduction: We can introduce the answer by stating the objective behind 1909 reforms or we can also start by highlighting revolutionary and controversial provisions of the 1909 act.

Body:

Here we first have to highlight key features of the Indian Council Act, 1909. Since the directive is to elucidate, we must further explain the statement. We must divide the statement into the above-mentioned two halves and state arguments justifying them.

Conclusion:

We can conclude by summarizing the arguments of the body section or we can state how the 1909 act shaped the future regulations (1919 act, 1935 act etc.) of the British in India.

Answer: The Morley-Minto reforms or Indian Councils Act, 1909 was part revolutionary and part controversial. Revolutionary, as it introduced the method of election, widened scope of legislative council etc. whereas it was controversial as for the first time Separate electorates for Muslims for election to the central council was established. The Morley-Minto reforms were unable to justify the growing aspirations of Indians.

Indian Council Act, 1909: Key Features

Elective Principle: The elective principle was recognized for the non-official membership of the councils in India. Indians were allowed to participate in the election of various legislative councils, though on the basis of class and community.

Separate Electorates: For the first time, separate electorates for Muslims for election to the central council was established.

Increased Indian Representation: The number of elected members in the Imperial Legislative Council and the Provincial Legislative Councils was increased.

Indirect Election: The elected members were to be indirectly elected. The local bodies were to elect an electoral college, which in turn would elect members of provincial legislatures, who in turn would elect members of the central legislature.

Increased Powers: Powers of legislatures—both at the center and in provinces—were enlarged and the legislatures could now pass resolutions, ask supplementary questions, vote separate items in the budget though the budget as a whole could not be voted upon.

Appointment of Indian in Viceroy’s Executive Council: One Indian was to be appointed to the viceroy’s executive council (Satyendra Sinha was the first Indian to be appointed in 1909).

The Indian nationalist, however, by this time, demanded self-government and anything less was completely unacceptable. Plus, they also called for unification of Bengal and decreasing British expenditure on army and other services.

Indian Council Act, 1909: ‘Afforded no Answer’:

No Self-Government: The Indian National Congress demanded a self-governing system like that in the other British colonies. However, the Indian Council Act (ICA) 1909 didn’t accept the demand.

Divide and Rule: The British decided to pacify the moderates by showing incremental reforms and used instruments like separate electorates to divide Hindu-Muslim.

Contradictory to Demands: The INC hoped for provisions which would set up a responsible government in the country, however, the British very cunningly came up with the plan of electing representatives from India in the council which in due time resulted in constitutional autocracy.

Too Surface Level Reforms: The system of election, advocated by ICA 1909 was too indirect and it gave the impression that only selected, or handful of Indians were allowed in the parliament.

Indian Council Act, 1909: ‘Could Afford no Answer to Indian Problems’:

Morley – Against Indian Self-Government: Lord Morley (Secretary of State for India during the period) was against rewarding self-government in India. He felt that colonial self-government was not suitable for Indians.

Swadeshi Movement: Lord Morley believed that growing nationalism in Bengal needs to be curbed and mere partition of Bengal won’t suffice. Plus, the launch of mass agitation in the form of the Swadeshi Movement made Morley deny Indians the right to self-govern.

Aimed at Dividing the Nationalist and Against the unity: By Confusing the Moderates and checking the growth of unity among the Indian through the separate electorates.

The reforms of 1909 gave the people of the country more of a shadow rather than substance. The people had demanded self-government but what they were given was ‘benevolent despotism’.