INDIA: Disappointment at New Delhi

Sir Victor Alexander John Hope, Marquess of Linlithgow, Earl of Hopetoun, Viscount Aithrie and Baron Hope sprained his ankle last week. The accident obliged him to cancel all engagements “involving standing or walking.” But he was still able to talk, and for many weeks he had promised a most important announcement in his official capacity—Viceroy of India. Last week the lame Lord Linlithgow made his statement. It turned out to be lame, too.

Indian nationalists have a well-taken point: Why should we support Britain in its fight for freedom and democracy when we have neither here? For years Britain has put India’s reasonable demands for dominion status off, “to be considered at the earliest possible time.” When the war began, Britain declared India in, without asking India’s wishes, and made vague promises of dominion status after the war. Indian nationalists, though naturally dissatisfied, showed—and still were showing last week—great restraint in not pressing Britain in the emergency. It was expected that Lord Linlithgow’s statement would repay India for this restraint.

The Viceroy made three feeble concessions: 1) the inclusion of certain “representative Indians” in the Viceroy’s Executive Council; 2) formation of a War Advisory Council including delegates chosen from the native princes; 3) reiteration of the promise of a new constitution after the war. Since the “representative Indians” would be viceregal stooges hand-picked by Lord Linlithgow, and since the War Advisory Council would have no power over the Imperial General Staff, India gained virtually nothing. With Italians driving into Somaliland, and the enemy threatening Aden and therefore Britain’s Near Eastern oil lines, India’s aid was last week more vital than ever.

After Lord Linlithgow’s statement, India’s aid looked no more promising, India’s patience looked strained.