Vol. 17, Part I · pages 86–90

SECTION III ROLE OF DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR IN BRINGING THE UNTOUCHABLES ON THE POLITICAL HORIZON OF INDIA AND LAYING A FOUNDATION OF INDIAN DEMOCRACY

63ROLE OF ......................... INDIAN DEMOCRACY ROLE OF DR. B. R. AMBEDKAR IN BRINGING THE UNTOUCHABLES ON THE POLITICAL HORIZON OF INDIA AND LAYING A FOUNDATION OF INDIAN DEMOCRACY “In the Government of India Act of 1919, there was a provision which had imposed an obligation on his Majesty’s Government to appoint at the end of ten years a Royal Commission to investigate into the working of the Constitution and report upon such changes as may be found necessary. Accordingly, in 1928 a Royal Commission was appointed under the Chairmanship of Sir John Simon. Indians expected that the Commission would be mixed in its personnel. But Lord Birkenhead who was then the Secretary of State for India was opposed to the inclusion of Indians and insisted on making it a purely Parliamentary Commission. At this, the Congress and the Liberals took great offence and treated it as an insult. They boycotted the Commission and carried on a great agitation against it. To assuage this feeling of opposition it was announced by His Majesty’s Government that after the work of the Commission was completed representative Indians would be assembled for a discussion before the new constitution for India is settled. In accordance with this announcement representative Indians were called to London at a Round Table Conference with the Representatives of Parliament and of His Majesty’s Government.” 1 “In order to ease the troubled situation in India, the British Government decided to re-examine and revise the Act of 1919. So it announced the appointment of the Indian Statutory Commission better known as the Simon Commission after Sir John Simon, its Chairman. The Commission consisted of two Peers and four Commoners to work under Sir John Simon, who was a great Parliamentarian, and it was declared that the proposals framed in the light of this Commission’s recommendations would be submitted to a Joint Select Committee at Westminster before which Indian witnesses would be examined. 1 : Writings and Speechs Vol. 9, P. 40

64 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES The Simon Commission came on its first visit, and landed at Bombay on February 3, 1928, to commence the work of re-examination of the Indian problem as declared in the Act of 1919. Its non-Indian character offered an affront to almost all Indian parties. The Congress Party decided to boycott the Commission at every stage and in every form. So, on its arrival, the Simon Commission was greeted with black flags, curses and placards with the slogan “Go back, Simon!” Congressmen staged hostile demonstrations on a nation-wide scale, and the police had to open fire at some places. This black welcome was also extended later to the Commission during its second visit in the winter of 1928-29. Meanwhile, the All Parties Conference convened by the Congress Party met in February and later in May 1928, and appointed a Committee under Pandit Motilal Nehru to draft a Swaraj Constitution for India. The Nehru Committee worked from June to August 1928 and drafted a Constitution.* It mainly aimed at closing the Muslim breach. As regards the Depressed or Suppressed Classes, the Nehru Report said : “In our suggestions for the Constitution we have not made any special provision for the representation of the ‘Depressed’ Classes in the legislatures. This could only be done by way of special electorates or by nomination.” But as these two methods were considered harmful and unsound, the Committee said that they were not going to extend either principle. They observed that their Declaration of Rights would be a panacea for all the ills affecting the Depressed Classes.** The attitude of the Congress Party towards the problem of the Untouchables will be clearer when one notices that the Congress Working Committee issued invitations to all prominent Muslim, Parsi, Christian, Sikh, Anglo-Indian organisations and even the * For comment by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, see editorial of ‘Bahishkrit Bharat’ dated 18th January 1929—Editors. ** All Parties Conference Report, 1928, Pp. 59-60.

65ROLE OF ......................... INDIAN DEMOCRACY Non-Brahmin institution and the Dravida Mahajana Sabha, but not to the Depressed Classes Institute led by Dr. Ambedkar or for that matter any Depressed Class Institution. It may be recalled that ten years before this Dr. Ambedkar had given evidence before the Southborough Commission. To co-operate with the Simon Commission the Central Government appointed a Committee for all British India, and every Legislative Council elected its Provincial Committee to work with the Simon Commission. On the Bombay Provincial Committee was selected Dr. Ambedkar along with other Members by the Bombay Legislative Council on August 3, 1928. The proceedings and tours of the Simon Commission lit up the Indian political firmament, and along with other forces it brought to the front the force, intellect and vitality of Dr. Ambedkar. Eighteen Depressed Class Associations gave evidence before the Commission and placed their memorandum before it. Sixteen of them pleaded for Separate Electorates for the Depressed Classes. On behalf of the Bahishkrit Hitakarini Sabha Dr. Ambedkar submitted a memorandum to the Simon Commission demanding Joint Electorate with reservation of seats for the Depressed Classes.* The Madras Central Adi-Dravida Mahajana Sabha demanded nomination for the Depressed Classes. The Bombay Provincial Non-Brahmin Party in its memorandum recommended Separate Electorate and reserved seats for the Depressed Classes. The Muslim League reiterated its demands for separation of Sind, creation of a new Province in the N. W. F., Separate Elecrorate for Muslims and residuary power for the Provinces in the federal constitution. On October 23, 1928, the Simon Commission, the Central Committee and the Bombay Provincial Committee examined Dr. Ambedkar in Poona.** The British Labour leader, Major Atlee, *See Writings and Speeches, Vol. 2. Pp. 429, 458. ** Ibid, Pp. 459-89.