\n– Statement 1: “They were named after the British Parliamentarians, Minto and Morley”. Lord Morley was the Secretary of State for India (a member of the House of Lords, thus a Parliamentarian). Lord Minto was the Viceroy of India. While Minto wasn’t a sitting Parliamentarian while Viceroy, the reforms are universally known as Morley-Minto Reforms, named after these two key figures responsible for them. In the context of such questions, the statement is likely considered correct, focusing on Morley’s role as a Parliamentarian and Minto as the Viceroy linked to the parliamentary process.
\n– Statement 2: “They provided for limited self-government by increasing the number of elected Indians in the Legislative Councils”. This is incorrect. The reforms explicitly aimed *not* at introducing self-government or a parliamentary system. Morley himself stated they had no intention of establishing a parliamentary system in India. They increased Indian representation but retained British control.
\n– Statement 3: “They contained provisions that ensured that British officials retained their majority in the Imperial Legislative Council”. This is correct. Although the number of elected and nominated non-official members was increased, an official majority was deliberately maintained in the Imperial Legislative Council to ensure the government could pass its legislation. In some provincial councils, a non-official majority (including elected and nominated non-officials) was allowed.
\n<\/section>\n