The Mahomedans demand three things.  I had the pleasure of receiving a deputation from them, and I know very well what is in their minds.  They demand the election of their own representatives to these councils in all the stages, just as in Cyprus, where I think, the Mahomedans vote by themselves.  They have nine votes and the non-Mahomedans have three, or the other way about.  So in Bohemia, where the Germans vote alone and have their own register.  Therefore we are not without a precedent and a parallel, for the idea of a separate register.  Secondly, they want a number of seats somewhat in excess of their numerical strength.  Those two demands we are quite ready and intend to meet in full.  There is a third demand that, if there is a Hindu on the Viceroy’s Executive Council—­a subject on which I will venture to say something to your Lordships before I sit down—­there should be two Indian members on the Viceroy’s Council and one should be a Mahomedan.  Well, as I told them and as I now tell your Lordships, I see no chance whatever of meeting their views in that way.

To go back to the point of the registers, some may be shocked at the idea of a religious register at all, a register framed on the principle of religious belief.  We may wish—­we do wish—­that it were otherwise.  We hope that time, with careful and impartial statesmanship, will make things otherwise.  Only let us not forget that the difference between Mahomedanism and Hinduism is not a mere difference of articles of religious faith or dogma.  It is a difference in life, in tradition, in history, in all the social things as well as articles of belief, that constitute a community.  Do not let us forget what makes it interesting and even exciting.  Do not let us forget that, in talking of Hindus and Mahomedans, we are dealing with, and are brought face to face with, vast historic issues.  We are dealing with the very mightiest forces that through all the centuries and ages have moulded the fortunes of great States and the destinies of countless millions of mankind.  Thoughts of that kind, my Lords, are what give to Indian politics and to Indian work extraordinary fascination, though at the same time they impose the weight of an extraordinary burden.

I come to the question which, I think, has excited, certainly in this country, more interest than anything else in the scheme before you—­I mean the question of an Indian member on the Viceroy’s Executive Council.  The noble Marquess said here the other day that he hoped an opportunity would be given for discussing it.  “Whether it is in order or not—­am too little versed in your Lordships’ procedure to be quite sure—­but I am told that the rules of order in this House are of an elastic description and that I shall not be trespassing beyond what is right, if I introduce the point to-night.”  I thoroughly understand Lord Lansdowne’s anxiety for a chance of discussion.  It is quite true, and the House should not forget it, that this question is in no way whatever touched by the Bill.  If this Bill were rejected by Parliament, it would be a grievous disaster to peace and contentment in India, but it would not prevent the Secretary of State the very next morning from advising His Majesty to appoint an Indian member of the Viceroy’s Executive Council.