What Is Transfer Of Power Agreement
It is, of course, impossible for Parliament to make and measure the most important statement that the Prime Minister has made to us. I must say that this seemed very difficult to understand, but the White Paper, which is in the voting office, will have to be carefully considered and will probably bring the highest level of evidence for those who are the best informed. There is no doubt that we will have a debate on this issue at an appropriate time. I am not asking for a specific date at this stage. However, I must say that the two conditions provided for at the time of the Cripps mission established under my government, namely, first, an agreement between the Indian parties and, second, a period of dominion status during which India, or part of it, is free to decide whether or not to remain in the Commonwealth Association of British Nations , seem filled. 1 At his press conference on 29 March 1942, Cripps said: “Indian states are governed by treaties. As far as I know, contracts with Britain will continue to exist, unless someone wants to change them…. If the Indian states do not join this Union, they will remain in exactly the same situation as they are today. But, at the same time, he made another statement: “There will be no maintenance of imperial troops in the country, unless it is done on request and in accordance with one of the new Indian trade unions.” (Mansergh, Nicholas (note), The Transfer of Power 1942-7, I, 541.Google Scholar) It seems that it was inconsistent to insert continuous protection of the crown, while eliminating the means necessary to make it effective.
Here are EXTRACTS of some documents, official and historical documents, circa 1947 August 15. We add notes and priorities. They show how wrong independence was. As I have said before, the two principles on which the Cripps mission came together, namely the agreement and a period of Dominion status with total freedom of choice, seem to be fulfilled, as I can see in the copy of the White Paper which is now in the polling station and which I received with the kind permission of the Prime Minister an hour ago. On 18 March 1947 Attlee wrote in Mountbatten: “It is of course important that the Indian states adapt their relations with the authorities to which they must transfer power to British India; But, as the Cabinet`s mission expressly stated, Her Majesty`s Government has no intention of transferring its powers and obligations to a successor government as part of the priority. There are no plans to conclude priority as a system before the final transfer of power date, but you have the right to enter into negotiations with individual states on the adaptation of their relationship with the Crown when you deem it appropriate. The princely states would be free from the orders and treaties of British rule in India. They can either join the two masters or remain separated” Lord Mountbatten (served in March-August 1947) was sent to replace Wavell as viceroy, as Britain was ready to transfer its power over India to a few “responsible” hands by June 1948.