Vol. 1 · pages 431–435
Castes in India, Annihilation of Caste, Linguistic States and other essays
This text was extracted automatically from the official PDF of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, so it may contain small errors. Always check the original page before quoting.
PDF page 431 (printed page 416)
416 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
Clause 2
The proposal cannot be controversial. The best remedy against tyranny
and oppression by a majority against the minority is inquiry, publicity and
discussion. This is what the safeguard provides for. A similar proposal
was also recommended by the Sapru Committee.
Clause 3
Social boycott is always held over the heads of the Untouchables by
the Caste Hindus as a sword of Democles. Only the Untouchables know
what a terrible weapon it is in the hands of the Hindus. Its effects and
forms are well described in the Report made by a Committee appointed
by the Government of Bombay in 1928 to investigate the grievances of
the Depressed Classes and from which the following extracts are made.
It illuminates the situation in a manner so simple that everybody can
understand what tyranny the Hindus are able to practise upon the
Untouchables. The Committee said:
“Although we have recommended various remedies to secure to the
Depressed Classes their rights to all public utilities we fear that there will
be difficulties in the way of their exercising them for a long time to come.
The first difficulty is the fear of open violence against them by the orthodox
classes. It must be noted that the Depressed Classes form a small minority
in every village, oppose to which is a great majority of the orthodox who are
bent on protecting their interests and dignity from any supposed invasion by
the Depressed Classes at any cost. The danger of prosecution by the Police
has put a limitation upon the use of violence by the orthodox classes and
consequently such cases are rare.
The second difficulty arises from the economic position in which the
Depressed Classes are found today. The Depressed Classes have no economic
independence in most parts of the Presidency. Some cultivate the lands of
the orthodox classes as their tenants at will. Others live on their earnings as
farm labourers employed by the orthodox classes and the rest subsist on the
food or grain given to them by the orthodox classes in lieu of service rendered
to them as village servants. We have heard of numerous instances where the
orthodox classes have used their economic power as a weapon against those
Depressed Classes in their villages, when the latter have dared to exercise their
rights, and have evicted them from their land, and stopped their employment
and discontinued their remuneration as village servants. This boycott is
often planned on such an extensive scale as to include the prevention of the
Depressed Classes from using the commonly used paths and the stoppage of
sale of the necessaries of life by the village Bania. According to the evidence,
PDF page 432 (printed page 417)
STATES AND MINORITIES 417
sometimes small causes suffice for the proclamation of a social boycott against
the Depressed Classes. Frequently it follows on the exercise by the Depressed
Classes of their right to use the common well, but cases have been by no
mean rare where a stringent boycott has been proclaimed simply because
a Depressed Class man has put on the sacred thread, has bought a piece
of land, has put on good clothes or ornaments, or has carried a marriage
procession with a bridegroom on the horse through the public street”.
This was said in 1928. Lest it should be regarded as a phase which has
now ended I reproduce below a copy of a petition by the Untouchables
of the village Kheri Jessore in the Punjab addressed to the Deputy
Commissioner of the Rohtak District in February 1947 and a copy of
which was sent to me. It reads as follows :
“From
The Scheduled Caste People (Chamars),
Village Kheri Jessore, Tehsil and District Rohtak.
To
The Deputy Commissioner,
Rohtak District, Rohtak.
Sir,
We, the following Scheduled Caste (Chamars) of the Village Kheri Jessore,
beg to invite your kind attention to the hard plight, we are put to, due to
the undue pressure and merciless treatment by the Caste Hindu Jats of
this village.
It was about four months back that the Jats of the village assembled
in the Chopal and told us to work in the fields on a wage in kind of one
bundle of crops, containing only about one seer of grains per day per man
instead of food at both times and a load of crops, and annas 8 in addition
which we used to get before above announcement was made. As it was
too little and insufficient to meet both ends, we refused to go to work. At
this they were enraged and declared a Social Boycott on us. They made a
rule that our cattle would not be allowed to graze in the jungle unless we
would agree to pay a tax not leviable under Government for the animals,
which they call as “Poochhi” They even do not allow our cattle to drink
water in the village pool and have prevented the sweepers from cleaning
the streets where we live so that heaps of dust and dirt are lying there
which may cause some disease if left unattended to. We are forced to lead
a shameful life and they are always ready to beat us and to tear down our
honour by behaving indecently towards our wives, sisters and daughters.
We are experiencing a lot of trouble of the worst type. While going to the
PDF page 433 (printed page 418)
418 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
school, the children were even beaten severely and in a merciless
manner.
We submitted an application detailing the above facts to yourself but we are
sorry that no action has been taken as yet.
It is also for your kind consideration that the Inspector of Police and Tehsildar
of Rohtak, whom we approached in this connection, made a careless investigation
and in our opinion, no attention was paid to redress the difficulties of the poor
and innocent persons.
We, therefore, request your good self to consider over the matter and make
some arrangement to stop the merciless treatment and threats which the Jats
give us in different ways. We have no other approach except to knock at your
kind door and hope your honour will take immediate steps to enable us to lead
an honourable and peaceful life which is humanity’s birth-right.
We beg to remain,
Sir,
Your most obedient servants,
Scheduled Caste People
(Chamars),
of Village Kheri Jessore,
Tehsil and District Rohtak.
Thumb Impressions.
* * * * *
Copy forwarded to the Hon’ble Dr. B. R. Ambedkar,
Western Court, New Delhi.
Received on 1st February 1947.”
This shows that what was true in 1928 is true even today. What is true
of Bombay is true of the whole of India. For evidence of the general use of
boycott by the Hindus against the Untouchables one has only to refer to
the events that occurred all over India in the last elections to the Provincial
Legislatures. Only when boycott is made criminal will the Untouchables be
free from being the slaves of the Hindus.
The weapon of boycott is nowadays used against other communities
besides the Scheduled Castes. It is therefore in the interests of all minor
communities to have this protection.
The provisions relating to boycott are taken bodily from the Burma AntiBoycott Act, 1922.
Clause 4
Such a provision already exists in Section 150 of the Government of India
Act, 1935.
PDF page 434 (printed page 419)
STATES AND MINORITIES 419
ARTICLE II—Section IV
PART I—C LAUSE I
There is nothing new in this clause. The right to representation in the
Legislature is conceded by the Poona Pact. The only points that require to
be reconsidered relate to (1) Quantum of Representation, (2) Weightage and
(3) The System of Electorates.
(1) Quantum
The quantum of representation allowed to the Scheduled Castes by the
Poona Pact is set out in Clause I of the Pact. The proportion set out in
the Pact was fixed out of the balance of seats which remained after (i) the
share of the other communities had been taken out; (ii) after weightage to
other communities had been allotted, and (iii) after seats had been allocated
to special interests. This allotment of seats to the Scheduled Castes has
resulted in great injustice. The loss due to seats taken out as weightage
and seats given to special interests ought not to have been thrown upon
the Scheduled Castes. The allotment of those seats had already been made
by the Communal Award long before the Poona Pact. It was therefore not
possible then to rectify this injustice.
(2) Weightage
There is another injustice from which the Scheduled Castes have been
suffering. It relates to their right to a share in weightage.
As one can see the right to weightage has become a matter of double
controversy. One controversy is between the majority and the minorities,
the other is a matter of controversy between the different minorities.
The first controversy relates to the principle of weightage. The majority
insists that the minority has no right to representation in excess of the ratio
of its population to the total population. Why this rule is insisted upon by
the majority it is difficult to understand. Is it because the majority wants
to establish its own claim to population ratio so that it may always remain
as a majority and act as a majority ? Or is it because of the fact that a
minority no matter how much weightage was given to it must remain a
minority and cannot alter the fact that the majority will always be able
to impose its will upon it. The first ground leads to a complete negation
of the basic conception of majority rule which if rightly understood means
nothing more than a decision of the majority to which the minority has
reconciled itself. This cannot be the intention of the majority. One must
put a more charitable construction and assume that the argument on which
the contention of the majority rests is the second and not the first. That
a minority even with weightage will remain a minority has to be accepted
in view of the insistence of a Communal Majority to remain a majority
PDF page 435 (printed page 420)
420 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
and to claim the privileges of a political majority which it is not. But
surely there is a difference between a defeat which is a complete rout and
a defeat which is almost victory though not a victory. Cricketers know what
difference there is between the defeat of a team by a few runs, a defeat by
a few wickets and a defeat by one whole innings. The defeat by one whole
innings is a complete frustration which a defeat by a few runs is not. Such
a frustration when it comes about in the political life of a minority depresses
and demoralizes and crushes the spirit of the minority. This must be avoided
at any price. Looked at from this point of view there is no doubt that the
rule of population—ratio—representation insisted upon by the majority
is wrong. What a minority needs is not more representation but effective
representation.
And what is effective representation? Obviously the effectiveness of
representation depends upon its being large enough to give the minority
the sense of not being entirely overwhelmed by the majority. Representation
according to population to a minority or to the minorities combined may be
effective by reason of the fact that the population of a minority where there
is only one or of the combined minorities where there are many is large
enough to secure effective minority representation. But there may be cases
where the population of a minority or of the minorities combined is too small
to secure such effective representation if the population ratio of a minority is
taken as an inflexible standard to determine its quantum of representation.
To insist upon such a standard is to make mockery of the protection to the
minority which is the purpose behind the right to representation which is
accepted as the legitimate claim of a minority. In such cases weightage
which is another name for deduction from the quantum of representation
which is due to the majority on the basis of its population becomes essential
and the majority if it wishes to be fair and honest must concede it. There
can therefore be no quarrel over the principle of weightage. On this footing
the controversy becomes restricted to the question, how is the magnitude
of weightage to be determined ? This obviously is a question of adjustment
and not of principle.
There can therefore be no manner of objection to the principle of weightage.
The demand for weightage is however a general demand of all the minorities
and the Scheduled Castes must join them in it where the majority is too big.
What is however wrong with the existing weightage is unequal distribution
among the various minorities. At present, some minorities have secured a
lion’s share and some like the Untouchables have none. This wrong must be
rectified by a distribution of the weightage on some intelligible principles.
(3) Electorates
1. The method of election to the seals allotted to the Scheduled Castes
is set out in clauses (2) to (4) of the Poona Pact. It provides for two