I hope it is not presumptuous to say so, but I should have expected a definition from my hon. friend of what he guesses these proposals are.  I should like to set a little examination paper to my hon. friend.  I have studied them for many months, yet would rather not be examined for chapter and verse.  But my hon. friend after his famous six weeks of travel knows all about them, and the state of affairs for which our plans are the inadequate remedy.  I do not want to hold him up as a formidable example:  but in his speech to-day he went over—­and it does credit to his industry—­every single one of the most burning and controversial questions of the whole system of Indian Government and seemed to say, “I will tell you how far this is wrong and exactly what ought to be done to put what is wrong right.”  I think I have got from him twenty ipse dixits on all these topics on which we slow dull people at the India Office are wearing ourselves to pieces.  When it is said, as I often hear it said, that I, for example, am falling into the hands of my officials, it should be remembered that those gentlemen who go to India also get into the hands of other people.

Dr. Rutherford:  I was in the hands both of officials and of Indians.

Mr. Morley:  Then let me assure him, perhaps to his amazement, that he came out of the hands of both of them still with something to learn.  I wonder whether, when this House is asked to condemn the present proposals of the Government of India as being inadequate to allay the existing and growing discontent, it is realised exactly how the case stands.  I will repeat what I said in the debate on the Indian Budget.  The Government of India sent over to the India Office their proposals—­their various schemes for advisory councils and so forth.  We at the India Office subjected them to a careful scrutiny and laborious examination.  As a result of this careful scrutiny and examination, they were sent back to the Government of India with the request that they would submit them to discussion in various quarters.  The instruction to the Government of India was that by the end of March, the India Office was to learn what the general view was at which the Government of India had themselves arrived upon the plans, with all their complexities and variations.  We wanted to know what they would tell us.  It will be for us to consider how far the report so arrived at, how far these proposals, ripened by Indian opinion, carried out the policy which His Majesty’s Government had in view.  Surely that is a reasonable and simple way of proceeding?  When you have to deal with complex communities of varied races, and all the other peculiarities of India, you have to think out how your proposals will work.  Democracies do not always think how things will work.  Sir Henry Cotton made a speech that interested and struck me by its moderation and reasonableness.  He made a number of remarks in perfect good faith about officials, which I received in a chastened spirit, for he has been for a very long time a very distinguished official himself.  Therefore, he knows all about it.  He went on to talk of the great problem of the separation of the executive and judicial functions, which is one of the living problems of India.  I can only assure my hon. friend that that is engaging our attention both in India and here.