Vol. 2 · pages 596–600

575IN SUB-COMMITTEE NO. VI †Chairman : The minor communities are really protected, not so much by the number of voters as by the number of representatives they have, whether they have separate electorates or whether they have joint electorates with reservation. That is in the main their protection. But in order to try to get a conclusion could not we say this, instead of using the words “each community”—Mr. Chintamani put it to me—“We desire that the Franchise Commission in making their proposal should bear in mind that the ideal system would as nearly as possible give the major communities a voting strength in proportion,” and so on. I think that would do. Sir C. Jehangir: “The two major communities.” Chairman : His point is, he does not want to confine himself to the major communities, but he wants to put it in this way that he is only recommending with regard to the major communities ; the Minor communities are not the subject matter of the recommendation at all. Cannot you meet him on that ? Sir C. Jehangir: It is too dangerous. When you talk about separate electorate, we have no separate electorates and we do not want them. Dr. Ambedkar : It means this, that in order to maintain the advantage of having a large existing electorate the suffrage should not be extended to the majority of the people. That is what it comes to, that in order that Sir Cowasji Jehangir should maintain the existing ratio of his population to the electoral strength the other people in the country should not be on the electoral strength. Sir C. Jehangir: All I mean is that the smaller community should not be jeopardised. Dr. Ambedkar: Your position is bound to be jeopardised in any lowering of the franchise, and if you feel that proportionately to the other voters your position goes down, then your safety lies either in trusting to the majority or in asking for separate electorates. But you cannot say : “Because we will be thrown down, we will sink, therefore other communities should not be given it.” It comes to nothing else but that. Sir C. Jehangir: I do not say that. Chairman : I am afraid that we will have to take our conclusion. Bear in mind, if you will, that we are agreeing to adult suffrage as an ideal. We have passed that part of the report. I have suggested the words “would as nearly as possible give at least major communities”. First of all I will put it to the Committee that the words should remain as they are “give, if possible, each community”. Who is against that ? A note will be taken that Sir Cowasji Jehangir, Colonel Gidney and Sardar Ujjal Singh dissent from the latter part. Dr. Ambedkar: If you want to place it before the Franchise Committee we should still like to say that in our view the principle of adult suffrage † Proceedings of the Sub-Committee No. VI (Franchise), pp. 171-72.

576 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES should be applied to the Depressed Classes. Chairman: We have got that already. Mr. Foot: Otherwise you would put an addendum to each paragraph. Chairman: We cannot have that every time. Mr. Jadhav: Brahmins and non-Brahmins and different communities in Bombay, Depressed Classes and all should be added. Chairman: We cannot go into that. (Dr. Ambedkar insists for recording his dissent from para. 13.) * * * * * †Mr. Foot: There is only one point In view of the general objection based upon the claim for adult suffrage, need you have a note following each paragraph ? Would not there be a general note at the end embodying the objection taken by Mr. Joshi and his colleagues ? Chairman: I think that would be better for you, I quite understand your position. Dr. Ambedkar: I leave it to you. Chairman: If I may say so, I think it might make you appear 10 be in rather a false position if, for instance, you appeared to be objecting to the women’s vote. Dr. Ambedkar: We have very good ground for doing that. We are quite prepared, in our minds, and we can meet whatever objection may be raised on that ground. We have no theoretical objection to women. Mr. Jadhav: The maximum of 25 per cent will be taken up by women, and then there will be no necessity of any other lowering of the franchise. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE CONFERENCE ‡Summary of the Report submitted by Sub-Committee No. VI (Franchise)—16th January 1931 (Some of the paragraphs related to Dr. Ambedkar’s proposals) The Sub-Committee recommended vide: Para. 4: (1) that an expert Franchise Commission should be appointed with instructions to provide for the immediate increase of the electorate so as to enfranchise not less than 10 per cent of the total population and indeed a larger number—but not more than 25 per cent of the total population—if that should, on a full investigation, be found practicable and desirable, (2) that in addition to providing for this increase, the commission should consider the introduction of a scheme by which all adults not entitled to a direct vote would be grouped together in primary groups of † Proceedings of the Sub-Committee No. VI (Franchise), pp. 175-76. ‡ Ibid., pp. 178-79.

577IN SUB-COMMITTEE NO. VI about 20 or in some other suitable manner, for the election of one representative member from each group, who would be entitled to vote in the Provincial elections either in the same constituencies as the directly qualified voters or in separate constituencies to be formed for them. (Mr. Joshi, Mr. Shiva Rao, Dr. Ambedkar, Mr. Srinivasan, Mr. K. T. Paul and Mr. Jadhav regard these proposals as quite inadequate and consider that the immediate introduction of adult suffrage is both practicable and desirable.) Para. 7: The Sub-Committee was of opinion that the Franchise Commission should consider the possibility of framing a suitable educational qualification as an additional qualification for the franchise. Para. 8: The Sub-Committee agreed that the existing Military Service qualification should be retained and recommended that the Franchise Commission should consider the extension of this qualification so as to include service in the Auxiliary and Territorial Forces. Para. 9 : The Sub-Committee agreed that special qualifications should be prescribed for women and recommended that the Franchise Commission should devote special attention to this question in the light of all the evidence available including the recommendation of the Statutory Commission and the suggestion made in the Sub-Committee that the age-limit mentioned in the proposals of the Statutory Commission should be lowered from 25 to 21. (Mr. Joshi, Mr. Shiva Rao, Dr. Ambedkar and Mr. Srinivasan dissent from the proposals in paragraphs 7, 8 and 9.) 13. The Sub-Committee considered it inadvisable to lay down any programme of automatic extension of the franchise. It preferred that it should be left to each Provincial Legislature to extend its franchise at its discretion, after a lapse of 10 years from the date of the introduction of the new constitution. (Mr. Joshi, Mr. Shiva Rao, Dr. Ambedkar and Mr. Srinivasan considered that a preference of automatic extension of the franchise should be laid down.) [No comments by Dr. Ambedkar in the discussion. Comments in Committee of the Whole Conference (16th January 1931) on Report of Sub-Committee No. VI (Franchise) by Mr. N. M. Joshi. ] Mr. Joshi: I want to make one point clear, on paragraph 9. It is said that Mr. Joshi, Mr. Shiva Rao, Dr. Ambedkar and Mr. Srinivasan dissent from the proposals in paragraphs 7, 8 and 9. I want it to be noted that we are not against the claims of women for some kind of qualification being created for them. Unfortunately, we had to take up the attitude which we did in the Committee, on account of the fact that the Committee fixed a certain limit to the total number of voters, being created, and in these circumstances it became our duty to protect the interests of the unenfranchised because if we accept the principle of giving votes to the

578 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES wives of those who are enfranchised, the limit of enfranchising those who had not the franchise is bound to be higher. On account of the special and difficult position in which we were placed we had to take up the attitude of not giving votes to the wives of those who are already enfranchised and thus depriving the unenfranchised of their rights. We are not against removing the disqualification of sex. Chairman: Paragraph 9 noted

6 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE CONFERENCE Comments on the Report of Sub-Committee No. VII (Defence)—16th January 1931 *Dr. Ambedkar: What I want to do is to move an amendment to clause (2) of paragraph 4 of this Report to the following effect, that immediate steps be taken to see that recruitment to the Indian Army is thrown open to all subjects of His Majesty, including the depressed classes, consistently with consideration of efficiency and the possession of the necessary qualifications. I do not merely wish to have this matter recorded ; I wish to move it as a substantive amendment, so that the sense of the House may be taken on it. My amendment is very simple one ; it seeks to remove all discriminations between the different classes of His Majesty’s subjects to enter Military Service. No doubt I move the amendment primarily with a view to protecting the specific rights of the depressed classes, but in doing so I am not asking the Committee to confer any favour, I am asking the Committee to see us realize in practice the principle recognized in the Government of India Act, that no subject of His Majesty shall be debarred from entering any Public Service by reason of his caste, creed or colour. In doing so, therefore, I do not think I am asking for any special favour. I may point out to you, Sir, this amendment is on the lines adopted by the Service Committee. If you will refer, Sir, to the Report of Service Committee appointed by this Committee, you will find that the Service Committee did make a serious effort to see that all subjects of His Majesty had a fair and adequate chance in Public Services of the country, and that they not only enunciated certain fundamental rights protecting subjects of His Majesty from being debarred from entering any Public Service, but they went out of their way to make special recommendations, mentioning certain specific communities, such as the Anglo-Indians and the Depressed Classes. But, Sir, this amendment is not merely in the interests of the depressed classes. I submit it is also in the interests of all communities and subjects of His Majesty. I think, Sir, that it is a great public danger that any *Proceedings of the R.T.C. (First Session), pp. 379-80.