Library › Vol. 2

Vol. 2 · pages 731–735

In the Bombay Legislature, with the Simon Commission and at the Round Table Conferences

This text was extracted automatically from the official PDF of Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, so it may contain small errors. Always check the original page before quoting.

PDF page 731 (printed page 710)

Open the original page

710 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES representation aimed at securing modification of it which is not supported by all the parties affected.” 6. Under your decision, the Hindus (including all alleged depressed classes) have been given 80 seats whereas Mahomedans get 119 seats, i.e. 50 per cent. more than Hindus. The European interests get 25 seats, viz. 10 per cent. of the total seats, while they do not form any appreciable fraction of even one per cent. of the population. Factors of position, influence, education, etc., have apparently been considered, and legitimately considered in case of Europeans—but of heads has been considered between Hindus and Mahomedans. The latter claim to constitute 54 per cent. by inclusion of infants below 21 years, for if adults are counted, Mahomedans have no appreciable majority, if at all. 7. Even if Mahomedans form 54 per cent. of the population, their getting 50 per cent. more than Hindus is explained by the fact of carving out of the special seats, 51 in number in disproportionately large share from the Hindus. 8. The nature of the Special Seats, which include 25 for Europeans, 4 for Anglo-Indians, 8 for Labour, clearly does not lend itself to the suggestion that Hindus can make up their proper share in the total from these seats. 9. I fully realise that having regard to the wording of your decision, arguments, however forcible, cannot be listened to by you, but with the best of intentions the decision operates very unfairly on Hindus—and that is all the greater reason why Bengal Hindus other than the Depressed Classes object to the whittling down of what has been given to them by your decision. I may be permitted to add that if for the sake of argument it is assumed that one community has got nearly 50 per cent. more than its share it is idle to expect that it will give up its unjustified gain from any abstract considerations of justice. 10. The matter involved relates solely to a question of fact, viz., did the people now complaining agree to the modification of your decision ? The laboured argument about agreement by alleged “defaults”, it is submitted, has no force. In any case, it remains to be determined whether there has been such default, from which it can be concluded that Bengal non-depressed classes have agreed to alter your Award. 11. It is submitted that the matter is too important to be dealt with on the footing, that the telegram of Birla and Thakkar represent facts correctly—facts which have been disputed. Nor does any agreement follow, even if these facts are taken to be substantially correct. 12. In the interest of the party aggrieved, an enquiry as to the fact of the non-depressed classes in Bengal being parties to, or being bound by the Poona Pact, should be made—whether through the Government of India or Bengal, or any other responsible and neutral Agency, is a matter of detail. I am forwarding a copy of this letter to Dr. Ambedkar for information

PDF page 732 (printed page 711)

Open the original page

711DISCUSSION ON POONA PACT As I have to leave England very soon, any acknowledgment of, or reply to this representation may be kindly directed to be forwarded to — Mr. Narendra Kumar Basu, M.L.C., Bar Association, High Court, Calcutta. Yours truly, (Signed) N. N. S IRCAR, Member, Indian Round Table Conference. CABLEGRAM FROM SIR RABINDRANATH TAGORE Dated 27th July, 1933 To Sir N. N. Sircar, I remember to have sent a cable to the Prime Minister requesting him not to delay in accepting the proposal about Communal Award submitted to him by Mahatmaji. At that moment a situation had been created which was extremely painful not affording us the least time or peace of mind to enable us to think quietly about the possible consequences of the Poona Pact which had been effected before my arrival when Sapru and Jayakar had already left with the help of members among whom there was not a single responsible representative from Bengal. Upon the immediate settlement of this question Mahatmaji’s life depended and the intolerable anxiety caused by such a crisis drove me precipitately to a commitment which I now realise as a wrong done against our country’s permanent interest Never having experience in political dealings while entertaining a great love for Mahatmaji and a complete faith in his wisdom in Indian politics I dared not wait for further consideration not heeding that justice had been sacrificed in case of Bengal. I have not the least doubt now that such an injustice will continue to cause mischief for all parties concerned keeping alive the spirit of communal conflict in our Province in an intense form making peaceful government perpetually difficult. — RABINDRANATH TAGORE LETTER AND ENCLOSURES FROM D R. AMBEDKAR TO THE PRIME MINISTER Imperial Hotel, Russell Square, London, W.C.I. 5th January, 1933 My Dear Prime Minister, Sir N. N. Sirkar has been good enough to send me a copy of the letter, dated 19th December, 1932, which he addressed to you just before his departure for India, in which he has laid before you for your consideration certain telegrams received by him from the Caste Hindus of Bengal protesting against the application of the terms of the Poona Settlement between the Caste Hindus and the Depressed Classes of Bengal on the ground that the Bengal Caste Hindus were not represented at the Settlement.

PDF page 733 (printed page 712)

Open the original page

712 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES I had also received telegrams on behalf of the other side. Of these I had shown to Sir N. N. Sircar one which had come from Messrs. Thakkar and Birla, who had acted on behalf of Mr. Gandhi in the course of the negotiations that resulted in the Poona Settlement and the text of which has been quoted by him in his letter. I did not, however, like to trouble you with them, firstly because His Majesty’s Government, having accepted the Poona Settlement, the matter, in my opinion, was closed, and secondly because I was assured by Sir N. N. Sircar that he would do nothing more than forward the telegrams received by him for your information. But as Sir N. N. Sircar has not contented merely with forwarding the telegrams, but has urged that “the laboured argument about agreement by alleged default” used by Messrs. Thakkar and Birla in their telegram has no force and has ended with a plea “that any enquiry as to the fact of the non-depressed classes in Bengal being parties to, or being bound by the Poona Pact should be made ………… through the Government of India, Bengal or any other responsible and neutral agency,” I feel called upon to place my views on the question raised by him. My first submission is that assuming that the Bengal Hindus were not represented at the Poona Settlement it cannot for that reason alone make it inapplicable to Bengal. Paragraph 4 of the Communal Decision of His Majesty’s Government under which they had provided for an agreement settlement to supersede the terms of their award did not, in my opinion, stipulate that in respect of an alternative scheme for the whole of British India—and the Poona Settlement, it must be remembered, was for the whole of British India—Caste and Depressed—province for province was a necessary condition for its acceptance. Indeed, I go further and say that such a stipulation is not postulated in the Communal Decision even for a settlement in respect of a single province. According to my reading of paragraph 4 all that is stipulated is that His Majesty’s Government should be satisfied that the communities who are concerned are mutually agreed upon a practicable alternative scheme. Taking my stand on this interpretation of paragraph 4, I venture to say that the absence of the representatives of Bengal Caste Hindus cannot derogate from the applicability of the Poona Settlement to Bengal. If the contrary interpretation were true it would then be open to the Depressed Classes of Punjab, U.P. and Bihar and Orissa to repudiate the Poona Settlement, for they were not represented at all. My second submission is that it is really not necessary to proceed on the assumption that the Bengal Caste Hindus were not represented as is alleged by the signatories to the telegram forwarded to you by Sir N. N. Sircar. I know for a fact they were represented and the statement of Messrs. Thakkar and Birla in their telegram that the Bengal Hindus did not respond to the invitation sent to them—a statement on the basis of which Sir N. N. Sircar has founded his plea for an enquiry is incorrect. What is more important to bear in mind is that these representatives of

PDF page 734 (printed page 713)

Open the original page

713 DISCUSSION ON POONA PACT Bengal were not merely present as silent spectators, they were active participants in the negotiations. I very well remember one of them came to me in Bombay accompanied by a Bengal Depressed Class youth of the Raja Party and had a private conference with me for nearly an hour and a half in the course of which he urged me to come to terms with the Caste Hindus on the basis of joint electorates. It is, therefore, quite untrue to say that the Bengal Caste Hindus were not represented, and the inaccuracy in the statement of Messrs. Thakkar and Birla must be attributed to the impossibility of keeping in touch with all the details of the negotiations which, having regard to the momentous character of issues involved, is quite excusable. I am sorry I am not in a position to give you the name of the Bengal Caste Hindu gentleman who had this conference with me. But I will let you have his name immediately after my return to India. There is therefore no case for reopening the Poona Settlement on behalf of the Caste Hindus of Bengal. As for the Depressed Classes, their spokesman, Mr. M. B. Mullick, has cabled to me that they accept the Poona Pact. His telegram and the telegram of Messrs. Thakkar and Birla are enclosed herewith in original for your information. I am leaving for India next week. Any further communication which you may wish to have with me in connection with this matter may be sent to my address in Bombay, which I give below for ready reference. Yours truly, (Signed) B. R. A MBEDKAR. Address : Damodar Hall, Parel, Bombay-12 (India). COPY OF TELEGRAM DATED 1 ST DECEMBER, 1932 1774. Delhi. 118.29.2020. DLT Doctor Ambedkar, India Office, London. Regarding Bengal Hindu friends cable for revision, Poona Pact for Bengal they defaulted twice one before Lothian Committee when they failed to give list of Depressed Castes second when invited to Bombay September Conference nobody responded now they raise false cry besides they are unjustifiably afraid of Namsudras appropriating all seats further Bengal Government depressed population figure is 103 lacs vide Lothian volume two page 263 while we assumed for calculation of seats 75 lacs vide Lothian Poona Pact follows closely Lothian recommendations refer Mullick’s note Lothian volume two page 251 in Calcutta Thakkar found general Hindu feeling in favour of Pact hence Pact approved by Cabinet can’t be revised. — B IRLA AND THAKKAR

PDF page 735 (printed page 714)

Open the original page

714 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES COPY OF TELEGRAM DATED 26 TH DECEMBER, 1932 WLT Ambedkar, Indian Conference, London. Bengal Depressed Classes accept Poona Settlement so do Hindus Council Hindus representation malafide perverse.—MULLICK. (13) Dr. B. S. Moonje, Mr. B. C. Chatterjee, Mr. J. Bannerjee, Mr. G. A, Gavai, Rai Saheb Meherchand Khanna, Mr. R. M. Deshmukh, Mr. Bhai Parmanand and Pandit Nanak Chand, on behalf of the Hindu Mahasabha *8813. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : I just want to ask one or two questions of Dr. Moonje, to start with. Dr. Moonje, you have been asked certain questions by Sir Nripendra Sircar about the meeting that was called by Pandit Madan Mohan Malviya in Bombay to discuss what could be done with regard to the question that was raised by the fast of Mahatma Gandhi. I just want to ask you one or two questions in order to bring out the details. You were present at the first conference which took place in Bombay under the presidency of Pandit Malviya on 19th September 1932. Dr. Moonje : Yes. 8814. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : At that meeting, as you know, a small SubCommittee was appointed ? Dr. Moonje : Yes. 8815. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Consisting of the representatives of the Depressed Classes and of the caste-Hindus, including Mr. Jayakar, Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru and others ? Dr. Moonje : Yes. 8816. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : That Sub-Committee went over to Poona to discuss the question ? Dr. Moonje : Yes. 8817. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Because they thought it would be very desirable to be near Mahatma Gandhi when the matter was being discussed. The Poona Pact was arrived at Poona as a result of the deliberations of the Sub-Committee, in agreement with Mahatma Gandhi ? Dr. Moonje : Yes. 8818. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Then the main Hindu Committee which had appointed this Sub-Committee met again in Bombay on the 25tb September ? Dr. Moonje : It may be. I was not present 8819. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : At that meeting the Pact was put to the vote and passed : is that not so ? Dr. Moonje : I am glad that Dr. Ambedkar has given me an opportunity of explaining all the details. 8820. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Do you know that of your own knowledge ? Dr. Moonje : I can give the details which I, personally, know. *Minutes of Evidence, Vol. II-C, 31st July 1933, pp. 1425-34.