Vol. 17, Part II · pages 286–290

21 THE CABINET MISSION AND THE UNTOUCHABLES How the Cabinet Mission have Ignored the Untouchables ? “Karachi, October 14, 1946, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, Scheduled Castes Leader and Former Member of the Viceroy’s Executive Council, arrived in Karachi by air from Bombay on his way to London today. Dr. Ambedkar said that he was proceeding on a political mission and would meet Mr. C. R. Atlee, Prime Minister, and Mr. Churchill and discuss Indian constitutional matters with them. He declined to be drawn into any further discussion or to clarify the details of his mission—A.P.I.” 1 Dr. B. R. Ambedkar prepared and carried following Memorandum for circulation—Editors. “The Cabinet Mission in their Statement of 10th May set out their Interim and Long-term proposals for the solution of the political deadlock in India. The most galling and astounding feature of their proposals is their refusal to recognise the Untouchables as a separate and distinct element in the national life of India. The Mission has so completely ignored the Untouchables that not even once have they mentioned them in their long statement. To what extent the Cabinet Mission has gone in ignoring the Untouchables will be apparent from the following:— (i) The Untouchables have not been given the right to nominate their representatives in the Cenral Executive as have been done in the case of the Sikhs and the Muslims. In the present Interim Government they have got two representatives of the Scheduled Castes neither of them owe any allegiance or obligation to the Scheduled Castes. One is nominated by the Congress and the other is nominated by the Muslim League. (ii) In the interim Government, the Untouchables have not been given a fixed quota of representation as was done in the case of the Muslims. At the Simla Conference of 1945 it was 1: The Times of India, dated 15th October 1946.

264 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES agreed that Scheduled Castes should have at least two members in a Cabinet of 14. The reason for a change of front between 1945 and 1946 is not known. (iii) They have not been given the right to separate representation in the Constituent Assembly. How the Cabinet Mission’s decision constitutes a departure from established policy of H.M.G. 2. The decision of the Cabinet Mission has not only done a grave wrong to the Untouchables but it has registered a serious departure from the principles which have guided H.M.G. in its policy regarding Indian politics and regarding the position of the Untouchables. (i) Before 1920, the Constitutional changes in the Government of India were made by the British Government on their own authority and in accordance with their own wishes.. It was for the first time, that in 1920 that the British Government decided to frame the Constitution of India in consultation with Indians. Accordingly, a Round Table Conference was called to which Indians were invited. Among the Indians, there were representatives of the Untouchables who were invited separately and independently of the Congress or of any other political party. (ii) Mr. Gandhi, the Congress representative, at the Round Table Conference fought against the recognition of the Untouchables as a separate element in the national life of India and contended that they were part of the Hindus and were therefore not entitled to separate representation. The British Government over-ruled Mr. Gandhi and by their Award recognised that the Untouchables were a separate and distinct element in the national life of India and were therefore entitled to the same safeguards as the other minorities of India such as the Muslims, Indian Christians etc. (iii) The British Government adhered to this principle in the Simla Conference which was held in June 1945. Among the Indians invited to that Conference, there was a representative of the Untouchables who again was invited separately and independently of the Congress or any other political party.

265THE CABINET . . . . . . . . . UNTOUCHABLES (iv) It may be said that in the Constituent Assembly which formed part of the Cripps proposals of 1942, there was no provision for separate representation of the Untouchables and that therefore, the present proposals of the Cabinet Mission cannot be said to mark a departure. The answer is that they do. In the Cripps Proposals of 1942, it is not that the Untouchables alone were not given separate representation. The fact is that no minority community was given separate representation in the Constituent Assembly. But in the Constitution of the Constituent Assembly of the Cabinet Mission, the Muslims and the Sikhs have been given separate recognition and separate representation which is denied to the Untouchables. It is this discrimination which constitutes the wrong of which the Untouchables are complaining. 3. The inequity of the proposals of the Cabinet Mission thus lies in the fact that it departs from the policy of recognising the Untouchables as a separate element in the national life of India and discriminates them by not recognising them while recognizing the Muslims and Sikhs. How the Cabinet Mission’s decision abrogates the pledges given by H.M.G to the Untouchables ? 4. The non-recognition of the Untouchables as a separate element by the Cabinet Mission is contrary to the pledges given to them by and on behalf of the British Government. The following are some of the pledges worth mentioning. (i) “Nor must we forget the essential necessity in the interests of Indian unity, of the inclusion of the Indian States in any Constitutional Schemes. I need refer only two of them—the great Muslim minority and the Scheduled Castes—there are the guarantees that have been given to the minorities in the past ; the fact that their position must be safeguarded, and that those guarantees must be honoured.”

266 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES —Extract from the speech made by Lord Linlithgow, at the Orient Club, Bombay on January 10, 1940. (ii) “These are two main points which have emerged. On these two points, His Majesty’s Government now desire me to make their position clear. The first is as to the position of the minorities in relation to any future Constitutional Scheme . . . . . . It goes without saying that they (H. M. Government) could not contemplate the transfer of their present responsibilities for the peace and welfare of India to any system of Government whose authority is directly denied by large and powerful elements in India’s national life. Nor could they be parties to the coercion of such elements into submission to such a Government.” —Extract from the Statements by Lord Linlithgow on 8th August 1940. (iii) “Congress leaders . . . . . . have built up a remarkable organization, the most efficient political machine in India... if only they had succeeded. If the Congress could in fact speak, as it professes to speak, for all the main elements in India’s national life, then however advanced their demands, our problem would have been in many respect far easier than it is today. It is true that they are numerically the largest single party in British India, but their claim in virtue of that fact to speak for India is utterly denied by very important elements in India’s complex national life. These others assert their right to be regarded not as mere numerical minorities but as separate constituent factors in any future Indian policy. The foremost among these elements stands the great Muslim community. They will have nothing to do with a Constitution framed by a Constituent Assembly elected by a majority vote in geographical constituencies. They claim the right in any constitutional discussions to be regarded as an entity against the operations of a mere numerical majority. The same applies to the great body what are known as the

267THE CABINET . . . . . . . . . UNTOUCHABLES Scheduled Castes who feel, in spite of Mr. Gandhi’s earnest endeavours on their behalf, that as a community, they stand outside the main body of the Hindu community which is represented by the Congress.” —Extract from the speech by the Rt. Hon’ble Mr. L.S. Amery, Secretary of State for India, in the House of Commons on August 14, 1940. (iv) “Without recapitulating all these reasons in detail, I should remind you that His Majesty’s Government at that time made it clear:— (a) That, their offer of unqualified freedom after the hostilities was made conditional upon the framing of a Constitution agreed by the main elements of India’s national life and the negotiation of the necessary treaty arrangements with His Majesty’s Government; (b) That, it is impossible during the period of hostilities to bring about any change in the Constitution by which means alone a “National Government” such as you suggest could be made responsible to the Central Assembly. The object of these conditions was to ensure the fulfilment of their duty to safeguard the interest of the racial and religious minorities, of the Depressed Classes and their treaty obligations to the Indian states.” —Extract from the letter by Lord Wavell to Mr. Gandhi, dated 15th August, 1944. 5. The Cabinet Mission’s proposal not to give separate representation to the Untouchables is not the result of their individual judgement arrived at on an honest examination of the relevant facts. On the other hand, what the Mission has done is to pamper to the prejudices of Mr. Gandhi. Mr. Gandhi is vehemently opposed to the recognition of the Untouchables as a separate element in the national life of India. He opposed their