Vol. 2 · pages 561–565

540 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES “free exercise” etc. What he wants also is that he drew special attention to the fact that that was no use to him unless he also had protection for an infringement of these rights, and he leaves it there. Then you have to consider what the remedy is hereafter. That is as I understood him. Dr. Ambedkar: That is my position. Discussion on paragraph 4 of the Report Dr. Ambedkar: I wish to suggest an amendment to the second subparagraph of paragraph 4. After the words “Depressed Classes” I should like to have the words added “barring a short initial period”. It would read “and would be acceptable to the Depressed Classes barring a short initial period”. Chairman: I understood you accepted it provided there was adult suffrage ? Dr. Ambedkar: I said that for ten years we should have separate electorate whether there was adult suffrage or not. Chairman: “And would be acceptable to the Depressed Classes after a transition period” ? Dr. Ambedkar: Yes. Chairman: Do you agree that makes it more accurate ? Mr. Chintamani: Are we to delete the proviso “provided the franchise was based on adult suffrage” ? Chairman: No, we cannot alter the speeches that were made. But what Dr. Ambedkar said—he will correct me if I am wrong—was that if there is to be no adult sutfrage then they must claim separate electorates, but if there is adult suffrage then, after a transition period, they would abandon them. I cannot allow the accuracy to be altered. Discussion on paragraph 12 of the Report Dr. Ambedkar: Sir, I should like to have the following words added to paragraph 12 in the beginning : “The minorities and the Depressed Classes were definite in their assertion that they would not consent to any selfgoverning constitution for India unless their demands were accepted.” And then you can proceed : “There was general agreement with respect to recommendations,” and so on. Speaking for myself, I think I made it very clear at the time when I delivered my speech in this Committee that unless we were assured that we were safe in the new constitution, we could give no consent to any constitution involving the principle of responsibility. If other communities do not care to join in this, it would go as my own statement on behalf of the Depressed Classes. Lt. Col. Gidney : I join in that statement too, Sir. Chairman: Of course, the statement as a matter of fact was made, and it was made in a representative way, not merely as an individual statement. But if that is put in in this report, you will observe the effect of it, that one or two of you will be able to say : “Our claims have not been satisfied.” It is not a decision of this Committee, but it does put obstacles

541IN SUB-COMMITTEE NO. III in the way of anything being done unless everybody says they are satisfied with what is being done. Whether you think it is wise to take that statement, undoubtedly made to the Committee, and put it in such a position as to make it necessary to record it in the report which the Committee sends to the Conference, is for you to say. I do not object at all, as a matter of record. Lord Reading: It is rather difficult to see what part it plays in this particular paragraph ; this is dealing with the Executive, and the only point which is mentioned about the new constitution is in regard to the successful working of it. Dr. Ambedkar: My position is this, Sir, that speaking for myself, I do not merely make a statement, and I do not want the record merely to say that I made certain demands ; I want the report also to record the strength of feeling that is in my mind behind this ; that it is not merely a demand which I made merely to be accepted or rejected, but I said that the acceptance of these demands was conditional on the acceptance of this. Lord Reading: I do not see how it can come in this paragraph at all. Dr. Ambedkar: It may come in anywhere. As it was dealing with general agreements, I thought these few lines might come in appropriately at the top of this paragraph. If you do not think it is suitable, I have no objection. Chairman: I do not think it can come in here ; I do not see how you can work that in here. You could raise it again. It is really what we should call in a Bill before the House of Commons a new clause and not an amendment to a clause 12. Dr. Ambedkar: In the third line it reads in this way : “that the representation on the Provincial Executives of important minority communities, i.e. Hindus, Muhammadans and Sikhs, was a matter of the greatest practical importance.......” My amendment is this, that we should delete the word “important”, because I do not want any discriminations made between minorities and minorities, but you should not mention any minority by name, and that if you are going to do so, then you must mention all the minorities. Dr. Moonje: That is exactly what I was going to say. Chairman: As a matter of fact, the reason why these words were put in is that they are in the report to which reference is made. What is the amendment ? We are not going to put in anything that you do not agree with. “That the representation on the Provincial Executive of minority communities” ? Dr. Ambedkar: Leave it there. Delete “Hindus, Muhammadans and Sikhs”. Chairman: Let us see what it means. It would then read : “that the representation on the Provincial Executives of minority communities was a matter of the greatest practical importance for the successful working”, and so on.

542 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Dr. Ambedkar: Yes. Chairman : That means that every minority community, if it is 8, 9, 10 or 12, must have a representative upon the Executive. Dr. Ambedkar: No; I would then add : “as far as possible leaving discretion to the Governor”. I should not like any community to be specifically mentioned. Lord Reading: Surely you must look and see what this says : “There was general agreement with the recommendation of Sub-Committee No. II (Provincial Constitution).” Then it goes on to quote it. Dr. Ambedkar: It should not. Dr. Moonje: My suggestion was a small one, but perhaps it might meet Dr. Ambedkar’s point of view. It was on the same lines : “important minority communities, i.e. Muhammadans, Sikhs, Depressed Classes,”. That was my small amendment. Lord Reading: Then the others will have to come in. Sir A. P. Patro: The Depressed Classes are not Hindus? Will you cut off the Depressed Classes ? With due respect, I say there are Depressed Classes who would simply revolt at the suggestion that they are not Hindus. In Southern India, if Dr. Ambedkar comes and says they are not Hindus, then I do not know what position Dr. Ambedkar will have in Southern India. Dr. Ambedkar: We are not discussing that here. Sir A. P. Patro: Therefore I say representation consistent with facts and experiences. Chairman: I have referred to the report to which reference is made. “Hindus, Muhammadans and others” I am told was put in by way of illustration, and these words do not appear in the report. Sir Muhammad Shafi: That is what I was going to say. Chairman: Just one minute. The word “important” docs “that the representation on the Provincial Executives of important minority communities”. Therefore “important” will have to stand. Members: Yes. Chairman : But “Hindus, Muhammadans and Sikhs” will have to go out; they have no business to be there. Dr. Ambedkar: Just before you go from that. Sir, I should like to draw attention to the words “working of the new constitution and it was also agreed that on the same grounds Muhammadans should be represented on the Federal Executive”. The words “important minorities” should replace the word “Muhammadans” there I mean, in keeping with what we are saying in the beginning. Chairman: Oh, yes ! “It was also agreed on the same grounds”— Dr. Ambedkar: “they should be represented also on the Federal Executive”. Chairman: “That important minorities should be represented on the

543IN SUB-COMMITTEE NO. III Federal Executive. On behalf of the smaller minorities a claim was put forward for their representation, either individually or collectively, on the Provincial and Federal Executives or that, failing this, in each cabinet, there should be a Minister specially charged,” and so on. That is exactly what was put forward. Lord Reading: Yes. Chairman: Officially. ***** *Chairman: As a matter of accurate recording, the use of the word “Muhammadans” is perfectly right. Sir Muhammad Shafi: Federal stands on a special footing. Chairman: “Muhammadans” stands. Mr. Joshi: Yes, I agree to that. Dr. Ambedkar: Then you must add to “Muhammadans”, “and other important minorities”. Chairman: No, you cannot. That was the claim. Dr. Ambedkar: May I not say so for myself ? Speaking for myself, I speak on behalf of the Depressed Classes as well. Mr. Joshi: It is not agreed. You did not make the claim. Dr. Ambedkar: It is not a question of whether I did or not. Chairman: Now, we are doing business, and it is two minutes to eleven. Dr. Moonje: I would ask, instead of the word “agreed,” that we should say, “it was also claimed that on the same grounds,” and so on. Sir Muhammad Shafi: No, no, it was agreed. That is a matter of fact. Dr. Moonje: I do not know what took place in the Federal Structure Committee. Sir Muhammad Shafi: The record shows it. Dr. Moonje: But here, of course, I do not agree with that point. Sir A. P. Patro: That is accepted, and it goes to the next paragraph. Dr. Moonje: A claim was put in. Chairman: The statement was made that the Muhammadans should be recognised, and to that, according to the minutes, there was an agreement, and that has just been lifted out of the records. Mr. Joshi: The records of this Committee ? Lt. Col. Gidney: I made a distinct statement on this matter when we had this before the plenary session, and I made statement to this effect—that it is all very well for the larger communities to demand certain things, but the minorities wanted some representation. Chairman : That is in. Lt. Col. Gidney: This is only an alternative. Chairman: Oh, no, it is not. The sentence gives an alternative, but it says the claim was made that there should be either representation of the * Proceedings of the Sub-Committee No. III (Minorities), pp. 144-46.

544 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES minorities direct, or, failing that that is, if that is impossible then. . . . . . . . Lt. Col. Gidney: That is all we want. Rao Bahadur Pannir Selvam: “Failing this” might replaced by “if this should be found impossible”. Chairman: Yes, instead of “failing this”, “if that should be found impossible”. There is no reason why that should not be substituted, “if this should be found impossible”. Lord Reading: What is the difference ? We are spending time over interchangeable phrases, that is all. Sardar Ujjal Singh: Make provision for any other communities in the Federal Executive, and insert the words “important minorities” there. We might make some provision, somehow or other, not necessarily, but provision must be there. Chairman: May I bring you up against the hard facts of the situation. You cannot, on a Federal Executive, have every minority. Dr. Ambedkar: Let me make my position clear. In the Provincial Constitution, what we have done is, we have placed an obligation upon the Governor to endeavour to do it. He is not tied down, but in the endeavour he should certainly be allowed the freedom to select even from other important minorities. We are not tying him hand and foot in the making of the Constitution. All we have done is that we place an obligation on him not to select, but we place an obligation upon him merely to make an endeavour. Surely that is not tying him down hard and fast, and I submit that after the word “Muhammadans” the words “other important minority communities” should come. Chairman: No, we have passed that point. We are now at the second point. Sir A. P. Patro: May I refer to paragraph 13 ? Dr. Ambedkar: I would suggest that my dissent be recorded from paragraph 12. Sardar Ujjal Singh: After the word “Muhammadans”, “other important minorities” should be added. Lt. Col. Gidney: Why close it to the other minorities ? Chairman: I really must rule. As I have said already, we are not closing it to the other minorities. I am quite willing to discuss amendments on the words as they are, but really you must not raise false issues. This makes a claim that the other minorities shall also be represented, but if this should be found impossible—that alteration has been made—then there will be a Minister. That is an accurate record of the claims which were made. Paragraph 12 agreed. Dr. Ambedkar: I think our dissent should be recorded. Chairman: Very well. [Paragraph No. 12 as adopted finally by the Sub-Committee No. III (Minorities).] 12. There was general agreement with the recommendation of Sub-