Vol. 12 · pages 151–155

130 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES The Court of Nizamut Adawlut not precluded from passing sentence of death in certain cases V. It is further deemed necessary to declare, that nothing contained in this Regulation shall be construed to preclude the Court of Nizamut Adawlut from passing sentence of death on persons convicted of using violence or compulsion, or of having assisted in burning or burying alive a Hindoo widow, while labouring under state of intoxication, or stupefaction, or other cause impeding the exercise of her free will, when, from the aggravated nature of the offence proved against the prisoner die court may see circumstances to render him or her a proper object of mercy. The third piece of Social Legislation is the Caste Disabilities Removal Act XXI of 1850. It enacts as follows :— THE CASTE DISABILITIES REMOVAL ACT (XXI OF 1850) An act for extending the principle of section 9, Regulation VII, 1832, of the Bengal Code throughout the Territories subject to the Government of the East India Company. Preamble WHEREAS, it is enacted by section 9, Regulation VII, 1832, of the Bengal Code that “whenever in any civil suit the parties to such suit may be of different persuations, when one party shall be of the Hindu and the other of the Muhammadan persuation, or where one or more of the parties to the suit shall not be either of the Muhammadan or Hindu persuations, the laws of those religions shall not be permitted to operate to deprive such party or parties of any property to which, but for the operation of such laws, they would have been entitled, and whereas it will be beneficial to extend the principle of that enactment throughout the territories subject to the Government of the East India Company it is enacted as follows :— Law or Usage which inflicts forfeiture of, or affects, rights of change of religion or loss of caste to cease to be enforced 1. So much of any law or usage now in force within the territories subject to the Government of the East India Company as inflicts on any

131THE UNTOUCHABLES AND THE PAX BRITANNICA person forfeiture of rights or property, or may be held in any way to impair or affect any right of inheritance, by reason of his or her renouncing, or having been excluded from the communion of, any religion, or being deprived of caste, shall cease to be enforced as law in the Courts of the East India Company, and in the Courts established by Royal Charter within the said territories.” The fourth piece of Social Legislation is the Hindu Widows’ Remarriage Act XV of 1856. It enacts as follows:— An Act to remove all legal obstacles to the marriage of Hindu Widows. Preamble WHEREAS, it is known that, by the law as administered in the Civil Courts reestablished in the territories in the possession and under the Government of the East Indian Company, Hindu widows with certain exceptions are held to be by reason of their having been once married, incapable of contracting a second valid marriage, and the offspring of such widows by any second marriage are held to be illegitimate and incapable of inheriting property ; and WHEREAS, many Hindus believe that this imputed legal incapacity, although it is in accordance with a true interpretation of the precepts of their religion, and desire that the civil law administered by the Courts of Justice shall no longer prevent those Hindus who may be so minded from adopting a different custom, in accordance with the dictates of their own conscience ; and WHEREAS, it is just to relieve all such Hindus from this legal incapacity of which they complain, and the removal of all legal obstacles to the marriage of Hindu widows will tend to the promotion of good morals and to the public welfare; it is enacted as follows:— Marriage of Hindu widows legalized 1. No marriage contracted between Hindus shall be invalid, and the issue of no such marriage shall be illegitimate, by reason of the woman having been previously married or betrothed to another person who was dead at the time of such marriage, any custom and any interpretation of Hindu law to the contrary notwithstanding.

132 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Rigsts of widow in deceased husband’s property to cease on her re-marriage 2. All rights and interests which any widow may have in her deceased husband’s property by way of maintenance, or by inheritance to her husband or to his lineal successors, or by virtue of any will or testamentary disposition conferring upon her, without express permission to re-marry, only a limited interest in such property, with no power of alienating the same, shall upon her re-marriage cease and determine as if she had then died; and the next heirs of her deceased husband, or other persons entitled to the property on her death, shall thereupon succeed to the same. The fifth piece of Social Legislation prescribed an age limit for sexual intercourse with a woman. It is Act XLV of 1860 (Penal Code) Sec. 375. It enacted as follows:— “A man is said to commit ‘rape’ who except, in the case hereinafter excepted, has sexual intercourse with a woman under circumstances falling under any of the five following :— First: Against her will. Secondly : Without her consent Thirdly : With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband, and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married. Fourthly : (Left blank—ed.) Fifthly: With or without her consent, when she is under ten years of age. Explanation : (Left blank—ed.) Exception : Sexual intercourse by a man with his own wife not being under ten years of age, is not rape.” WHAT ABOUT THE UNTOUCHABLES ? Caste and Untouchability are the two great social evils in India. Caste has disabled the whole Hindu Society. Untouchability has suppressed a large class of people. And yet the British Government has completely ignored the two evils. One may search in vain the Indian Code to find any law dealing with Caste or with Untouchability. It is true that caste and untouchability are social matters. They will vanish when people will begin to interdine and intermarry. Law cannot compel a person to dine with another. It is true, law cannot compel a person to marry with another. But it is also true that Law can prohibit a Caste

133THE UNTOUCHABLES AND THE PAX BRITANNICA from preventing a person from marrying a person outside his caste. Caste continues because a Caste can conspire to punish its members if they break the rules of caste by declaring a social boycott against him. It would have been perfectly possible to have enacted a law declaring such social boycott to be a crime. Again in the matter of Untouchability the disabilities are not merely social. They are fundamentally civic. Inability to get admission to school, to be able to take water from a public well, to be able to get into a public conveyance, to be able to get into public service, are all civic disabilities. It was the duty of the British Government to legislate at least to the extent necessary to protect their civic rights. It was possible to do so. A short Enactment on the lines of Caste Disabilities Removal Act would have been sufficient. Yet the British Government has gone on as though these two evils did not exist at all. Indeed it is most extraordinary thing to note that although Legislative Bodies were established in India in 1861 and have been passing laws on every social questions and discussing public questions, yet except on two occasions the Untouchables were not even mentioned. The first occasion on which they were mentioned was in 1916, when one Parsi gentleman Sir Maneckji Dadabhoy moved the following Resolution in the Central Legislature :— “That this Council recommends to the Governor General in Council that measures be devised with the help, if necessary, of a small representative committee of officials and non-officials for an amelioration in the moral, material and educational condition of what are known as the Depressed Classes, and that, as a preliminary step die Local Government and Administrations be invited to formulate schemes with due regard to local conditions.” There was no sympathy to this resolution. The Hindu members of the Legislature were angry with the mover for his having brought such a subject before the Legislature. Pandit Madan Mohan Malviya said:— “Sir, it seems rather ungracious to say so, but a sense of the dignity of the proceedings of this Council compels me to utter a protest against the manner in which sometimes subjects are brought before it for consideration ................. “In moving the Resolution the object of which I may at once say, has my whole-hearted support, my friend, the Hon’ble Mr. Dadabhoy, went out of his way to make remarks against the Hindu community which,

134 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES I think, the ought to have avoided .................I am not here to defend everything Hindu that exists. I am not here to appologize for the many prejudices or superstitions, which I am sadly conscious are to be found among one portion or another of our community. But it is not the Hindu community alone which finds it difficult to get rid of prejudices ......... Without meaning the smallest disrespect, I would instance the case of the marriage with a Deceased Wife’s Sister Bill ........ We Hindus have got some much worse prejudices to fight against .......... But I do not think it is within the province of a member of this Council either to lecture to the Hindus present here or to those outside as to the socio-religious disabilities among themselves which they might fight against and remove. I think the province of Members of this Council is limited to dealing with matters of legislation or other administrative matters which may properly be taken up by the Government. As has been already pointed out, the Government have, in pursuance of a wise and liberal policy, laid it down that they shall not interfere in matters of a religious or socio-religious character, and accusations of the character in question ought, therefore, to be avoided there ........................... I do not wish to descend into a disputation as to the merits of the imputations or the justification for the general observations that have been made ................ And yet, if I do not, I am left in the position that I have heard without protest remarks showing that the Hindu Community from one end of the country to the other was guilty of all that my friend, the Hon’ble Mover of the Resolution, has suggested ....................... I am conscious that we Hindus have many prejudices to fight against and conquer; but I submit that this is not the place to tell us of them.” Even a social Reformer like Sir Surendranath Bannerjee was not happy. He said :— “....................I regret very much that my Hon’ble friend the Mover of this Resolution went somewhat out of his way to level (I do not think he did it intentionally) an attack against the Hindu Community. He must bear in mind that we are the inheritors of past traditions, of a civilization as ancient as the world. That civilization undoubtedly had its defects, but that civilization in the morning of the world was the guarantee for law and order and social stability. In the past it afforded consolation to millions. We are trying to evolve a national system in conformity with our present environments, but we cannot push aside all those things which have come down to us from the past. We reverence the venerable fabric which has been built up by our ancestors. We notice their defects, and we are anxious to get rid of them gradually and steadily, not by any revolutionary movement, but the slow, steady process of evolution. My friend must have a little sympathy with us ; he must extend to us the hand of generosity in our efforts to deal with the problems. My Hon’ble friend suggests that Government should take measures................... We welcome