Vol. 5 · pages 326–330
Essays on Untouchables and Untouchability
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 326
311
UNDER THE PROVIDENCE OF MR. GANDHI
the Provinces ...... As to the number of seats to be reserved, this
should obviously bear some proportion to the total number of the
Depressed Classes in the province ...... We propose that ...... the
proportion of the number of such reserved seats to the total seats
in all the Indian General constituencies should be three quarters
of the proportion of the Depressed Classes population to the total
population of the electoral area of the province.” ...... 1
As a matter of fact there was nothing new in this demand of the
Depressed Classes for separate political representation for themselves
by themselves and through themselves and the Simon Commission in
conceding it cannot be said to have made a new departure.
This demand was put forth in 1919.
At the time when the reforms which subsequently became embodied
in the Act of 1919 were being discussed, the authors of the Montague
Chelmsford Report clearly recognized the problem of the Untouchables
and the authors pledged themselves to make the best arrangement for
their representation in the Legislatures. But the Committee that was
appointed under the Chairmanship of Lord Southborough to devise
the franchise and the electoral system ignored them altogether. The
Government of India did not approve of this attitude and made the
following comments :
“They (Untouchables) are one-fifth of the total population and
have not been represented at all in the Morley-Minto Councils.
The Committee’s report mentions the Untouchables twice, but
only to explain that in the absence of satisfactory electorates
they have been provided for by nomination. It does not discuss
the position of these people, or their capacity for looking after
themselves. Nor does it explain the amount of nomination which
it suggests for them ...... The measure of representation which
they propose ...... suggested that one-fifth of the entire population
of British India should be allotted seven seats out of practically
eight hundred. It is true that in all the Councils there will be,
roughly speaking, a one-sixth proportion of officials who may be
expected to bear in mind their interests; but that arrangement
is not, in our opinion, what the Report on reforms aims at. The
authors stated that the Untouchables also should learn the lesson
of self-protection. It is surely fanciful to hope that this result can
be expected from including a single member of the community in
an assembly where there are sixty or seventy caste Hindus. To
make good the principles of the Report we must treat the outcastes
more generously.”
1 Report. Vol. II. pp. 65-66.
PDF page 327 (printed page 312)
312 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
The Government recommended that the seats allotted to the
Untouchables by the Committee should be doubled. Accordingly in place
of seven, they were given fourteen seats.
Again in 1923, the Secretary of State appointed a Committee which is
known as the Muddiman Committee. The principal object of the Committee
was to find out how far the constitution established by the Act of 1919
could be expanded by alterations in the Rules and without altering the
Act. The Committee made certain recommendations and pointed out the
necessity of increasing the representation of the Depressed Classes in
the Legislatures. This recommendation was accepted by the Secretary
of State who increased the number of seats.
Thus the right of the Depressed Classes to special representation
in the Legislature had become a principle which was not only accepted
but adopted in the Constitution. So well was this principle recognized
that it had been extended even to District Local Boards, School Boards
and Municipalities.
A claim which had been given legal recognition in 1919 and which
had thereby become a right and which had become perfected by user
the representatives of the Depressed Classes felt could not be disputed
by any body. There was no reason to fear that the Congress would come
forward seriously to dispute this right of the Depressed Classes. Because
although the Nehru Committee in 1929 in the Swaraj Constitution which
it was asked to frame had denied this right to the Depressed Classes,
the report of that Committee was not binding on the Congress. The
Congress was bound by nothing except its own resolution which was
passed in 1920, at its Nagpur Session to allay the fears of the Sikhs,
and which had declared its policy to treat all minorities alike in the
matter of representation in the Legislature 1.
The representatives of the Depressed Classes were therefore justified
in hoping that their demand would go through without any difficulty
whatsoever from any quarters.
At the first Round Table Conference things went very smoothly.
There was no trouble of any kind and although there was no
agreement on the minorities question, the right of the Depressed
Classes to special representation was accepted by all sections that were
represented at the Round Table Conference. The conclusions reached
by the Minorities Sub-Committee were embodied in its report which
1 The text of the resolution is as follows :
The Sikhs
“In view of the fact that misunderstanding exist among the Sikhs as to the position of
their community in the future polity of India, this Congress assures the Sikhs that their
interests will receive the same protection in any Scheme of Swaraj for India as is provided
for Mahomedan and other minorities in provinces other than the Punjab.”
PDF page 328
313
UNDER THE PROVIDENCE OF MR. GANDHI
was presented to the General Conference. The following are the
extracts from that report :
“There was general agreement with the recommendation of SubCommittee No. II (Provincial Constitution) that the representation
on the Provincial Executives of important minority communities
was a matter of the greatest practical importance for the successful
working of the new constitution, and it was also agreed that, on
the same grounds, Mohammadans should be represented on the
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,
if this should be found impossible, in each Cabinet there should
be a Minister specially charged with the duty of protecting
minority interests. (Dr. Ambedkar and Sardar Ujjal Singh would
add the words “and other important minorities” after the word
Mohammadans in line 6).
The difficulty of working jointly responsible Executives under such
a scheme as this was pointed out.”
“The discussion in the Sub-Committee has enabled the
Delegates to face the difficulties involved in the schemes put up,
and though no general agreement has been reached, its necessity
has become more apparent than ever.”
“It has also been made clear that the British Government
cannot, with any chance of agreement, impose upon the communities
an electoral principle which, in some feature or other, would be
met by their opposition. It was therefore plain, that, failing an
agreement, separate electorates, with all their drawbacks and
difficulties, would have to be retained as the basis of the electoral
arrangements under the new constitution. From this the question
of proportions would arise. Under these circumstances, the claims
of the Depressed Classes will have to be considered adequately.”
“The Sub-Committee, therefore, recommend that the Conference
should register an opinion that it was desirable that an agreement
upon the claims made to it should be reached, and that the
negotiations should be continued between the representatives
concerned, with a request that the result of their efforts should be
reported to those engaged in the next stage of these negotiations.”
Mr. Gandhi was not present at the first Round Table Conference
because the Congress had boycotted it. He came for the Second Round
Table Conference. What attitude did Mr. Gandhi take to this claim
of the Depressed Classes ?
PDF page 329 (printed page 314)
314 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
Every body expected that Mr. Gandhi would be more interested in seeing
that the constitution that was likely to emerge from these deliberations
and negotiations was a constitution which gave India Purna Swaraj i.e.
complete independence and he would not interest himself in so unimportant
a subject as the allocation of seats among the different minorities. But
events completely falsified these hopes. Mr. Gandhi completely gave up
his fight against British Imperialism altogether. He forgot that he had
come with a mandate 1 to secure a constitution which contained Purna
Swaraj. He left that issue and started fighting the minorities and what
is so strange he concentrated all his fire upon the representatives of the
Untouchables for daring to put forth the claim for special representation.
Mr. Gandhi opposed tooth and nail the representatives of the Depressed
Classes. He was not even prepared to look at their claim. He was annoyed
at their impudence and the whole Conference was astonished by his
opposition. They could not understand how a man like Mr. Gandhi who
posed himself as the friend of the Untouchables could in fact be so great an
enemy of their interests. His friends were completely baffled. Mr. Gandhi
was prepared to recognize a similar right claimed by the Musalmans and
to the Sikhs and although he was not prepared to recognize a similar
claim by Christians, Europeans and Anglo-Indians he was not going to
oppose their claim. Mr. Gandhi’s friends could not understand how he
could deny a similar right to the Untouchables. The Mohamedans, Sikhs,
Christians, Europeans and Anglo-Indians were far better off than the
Untouchables. The former were economically far better placed. The latter
were poorest of the poor. The former were educationally advanced, the
latter were educationally most backward. The former were socially well
respected, the latter were socially despised. The former enjoyed a position
of free citizens. The latter were suffering from certain disabilities. The
former were not subjected to social tyranny and social boycott but social
tyranny and social boycott were the every day lot of the latter. Having
regard to this difference in status there could never be any doubt that
if there was any section of the Indian people whose case called forth
1 The following resolution embodies the mandate which the Congress imposed upon
Mr. Gandhi when he was chosen by the Congress as its delegate. (This was a resolution
passed at the Karachi Congress).
“This Congress, having considered the provisional settlement between the Working
Committee and the Government of India, endorses it, and desires to make it clear that
the Congress goal of Purna Swaraj, meaning complete independence, remains intact. In
the event of a way remaining otherwise open to the Congress to be represented at any
conference with the representatives of the British Government, the Congress delegation
will work for this goal, and in particular so as to give the nation control over the army,
external affairs, finance, fiscal and economic policy, and to have a scrutiny by an impartial
tribunal of the financial transactions of the British Government in India, and to examine
and assess the obligations to be undertaken by India or England and the right to either
party to end the partnership at will; provided, however, that the Congress delegation will
be free to accept such adjustments as may be demonstrably necessary in the interests
of India.”
PDF page 330
315
UNDER THE PROVIDENCE OF MR. GANDHI
special protection, they were the Untouchables. When his European
friends tried thus to argue with Mr. Gandhi, Mr. Gandhi used to fly into
temper and his relations with two of the best of them to my knowledge
had become quite strained on this account.
Mr. Gandhi’s anger was largely due to the fact he could give no
rational answer which could convince his opponents that his opposition
to the claim of the Depressed Classes was sincere and was founded
upon the best interests of the Depressed Classes. He nowhere gave a
consistent explanation of his opposition to the Depressed Classes. Reading
his speeches in London while he was there one can see that he was
using three arguments in support of his position. Speaking as a member
of the Federal Structure Committee of the Round Table Conference
Mr. Gandhi said :
“The Congress has from its very commencement taken up the
cause of the so-called “untouchables”. There was a time when the
Congress had at every annual session as its adjunct the Social
Conference, to which the late Ranade had dedicated his energies,
among his many activities. Headed by him, you will find in the
programme of the Social Conference, reform in connection with the
Untouchables taking a prominent place. But in 1920, the Congress
took a large step, and brought the question of the removal of
untouchability as a plank on the political platform, and made it an
important item of the political programme. Just as the Congress
considered Hindu-Muslim Unity, thereby meaning unity amongst all
classes, to be indispensable for the attainment of Swaraj, so also
did the Congress consider the removal of the curse of untouchability
as an indispensable condition for the attainment of full freedom.”
At the minorities Sub-Committee of the Round Table Conference
Mr. Gandhi used another argument. He said :
“I can understand the claims advanced by other minorities, but
the claims advanced on behalf of the untouchables is to me the
“unkindest cut of all”. It means the perpetual barsinister. I would
not sell the vital interests of the untouchables even for the sake of
winning the freedom of India. I claim myself, in my own person,
to represent the vast mass of the untouchables. Here I speak not
merely on behalf of the Congress, but I speak on my own behalf,
and I claim that I would get, if there was a referendum of the
untouchables, their vote, and that I would top the poll. And I would
work from one end of India to the other to tell the untouchables
that separate electorates and separate reservation is not the way
to remove this bar-sinister, which is the shame, not of them, but
of orthodox Hinduism. Let this committee and let the whole world