WHAT CONGRESS
AND GANDHI HAVE DONE
TO
THE
UNTOUCHABLES
____________________________________________________________
"lt may be your interest to be our masters, but how can it be
ours to be your slaves ? "
—THUCYDIDES.
______________________________________________________________
PREFACE
Chapter I : A strange event
Chapter
II : A shabby show
congress abandons its plan
Chapter III : A mean
deal congress refuses to part with power
Chapter IV : An abject surrender congress bets an inglorious retreat
Chapter V : A political charity
congress plan to kill by kindness
Chapter VI : A false claim
does congress represent all ?
Chapter VII : A
false charge are untouchables tools of the
British ?
Chapter VIII : The
real issue what the untouchables want
Chapter IX
: A plea
to the foreigners let not tyranny have freedom to enslave
Chapter X :
What do the untouchables say? Beware of
Mr. Gandhi!
Chapter XI : Gandhism
the doom of the untouchables
APPENDICES
1
WHAT
CONGRESS AND GANDHI
HAVE
DONE TO
THE
UNTOUCHABLES
Dedication
(11) And Naomi said, Turn again, my Daughters;
why will ye go with me ? (12) go your way. .
. (14) And they lifted up their voice, and weft again, and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law;
but Ruth clave unto her, (15) And she said. Behold thy sister-in-law is gone back unto her
people, and unto her gods ; return thou after thy sister-in-law. (16) And Ruth said.
Intreat me not to leave them; or to return from following after thee ; for whither thou
goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge ; thy people shall be my people,
and thy God my God. (17) Where thou diest, will I die, and there will be buried; the LORD
do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me"
I know how, when we used to read the Bible
together, you would be affected by the sweetness and pathos of this passage. While you
will be glad to read it again you will, I am sure, ask me what made me recall it in this
connection. I wonder if you remember the occasion when we fell into discussion about the
value of Ruth's statement "Thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God." I
have a clear memory of it and can well recall our difference of opinion, You maintained
that its value lay in giving expression to the true sentiments appropriate to a perfect
wife. I put forth the view that the passage had a sociological value and its true
interpretation was the one given by Prof. Smith, namely, that it helped to distinguish
modern society from ancient society. Ruth's statement " Thy people shall be my people
and thy God my God" defined ancient society by its most dominant characteristic
namely that it was a society of man plus God while modern society is a society of men only
(pray remember that in men I include women also). My view was not then acceptable to you.
But you were interested enough to urge me to write a book on this theme. I promised to do
so. For as an oriental I belong to a society which is still ancient and in which God is a
much more important member than man is. The part of the conversation which is important to
me at this stage is the promise I then made to dedicate the book to you if I succeeded in
writing one. Prof. Smith's interpretation had opened a new vista before me and I had every
hope of carrying out my intention. The chances of developing the theme in a book form are
now very remote. As you know, I am drawn in the vortex of politics which leaves no time
for literary pursuits. I do not know when I shall be out of it. The feeling of failure to
fulfil my promise has haunted me ever since the war started. Equally distressing was the
fear that you might pass away as a war casualty and not be there to receive if I were to
have time to complete it. But the unexpected has happened. There you are, out of the
throes of Death. Here is a book ready awaiting dedication. This happy conjunction of two
such events has suggested to me the idea that rather than postpone it indefinitely I might
redeem my word, by dedicating this book which I have succeeded in bringing to completion.
Though different in theme it is not an unworthy substitute. Will you accept it ?
B. R. A.
To,
F.
In Thy Presence is the Fullness of Joy.
"In
1892, there took place in England a new election to Parliament, in which the Conservatives
headed by Lord Salisbury lost and the Liberals headed by Mr. Gladstone won. The remarkable
thing about this election was that notwithstanding the defeat of his party at the polls.
Lord Salisbury—contrary to Parliamentary convention—refused to surrender his
office to the leader of the Liberal Party. When Parliament assembled, the Queen delivered
the usual gracious speech from the throne containing the legislative programme of Lord
Salisbury's Government and the usual address to Her Majesty was moved from the Government
side. Lord Salisbury's Government was an illegitimate Government. It was a challenge to
the fundamental principle of the British Constitution, which recognised parliamentary
Majority as the only title deed for a Party's right to form a Government. The Liberals
took up the challenge and tabled an amendment to the address. The amendment sought to
condemn Lord Salisbury's Government for its insistence on continuing in office,
notwithstanding the fact that it had no majority behind it. The task of moving the
amendment was entrusted to the late Lord (then Mr.) Asquith. In his speech in support of
the amendment, Mr. Asquith used the now famous phrase—" Causa finita est: Roma
locuta est." (Rome has spoken and the dispute must end). The phrase was originally
used by St. Augustine but in a different context. It Was used in the course of a religious
controversy and had come to be used as a foundation for Papal Sovereignty. Mr. Asquith
used it as a political maxim embodying the basic principle of Parliamentary Democracy.
Today it is accepted as the fundamental principle on which Popular Government rests,
namely, the Right of a Political Majority to Rule. It told instantaneously against
Salisbury's Government and must tell against all parties who fail at the polls wherever
Parliamentary Democracy is in operation.
I
was reminded of this maxim when the results of the Elections to the Provincial
Legislatures in India, which took place in February 1987 under the Government of India
Act, 1985, were announced. Congressmen did not actually say "Causa finita eat : India
locuta est." But so far as the parties, which had opposed the Congress in the
Electiohs, were concerned, that is what the results of the Elections seemed, to proclaim.
Having led the Untouchables against the Congress for. full five years in the Round Table
Conference and in the Joint Parliamentary Committee, I could not pretend to be unaffected
by the results of the Elections. To me the question was: Had the Untouchables gone over to
the Congress ? Such a thing was to me unimaginable. For, I could not believe that the
Untouchables—apart from a few agents of the Congress who are always tempted by the
Congress gold to play the part of the traitor—could think of going over to the
Congress en masse forgetting how Mr. Gandhi and the Congress opposed, inch by inch up to
the very last moment, every one of their demands for political safeguards. I had therefore
decided to study the Returns of the election that took place in 1937. .
While
I was convinced that such a study was of great necessity from the point of view of the
Untouchables, the work proceeded at a snail's pace. This was due to three causes. The work
had to be kept aside for some time to give precedence to other literary projects, the
urgency of which demanded a degree of priority which it was not possible to refuse.
Secondly, the Blue Book on the Election Results of 1987, which was submitted to Parliament
soon after the elections had taken place and which is the primary source for figures
regarding the elections, proved inadequate and insufficient for my purpose. It does not
give separately figures showing how the Scheduled Castes electors voted and how many votes
the Scheduled Caste candidates got. It gives figures showing how electors in different
constituencies voted, without making any distinction between Hindu voters and the
Scheduled Castes voters. Circular letters had therefore to be issued to the various
Provincial Governments requesting them to send me the figures showing distribution of
voting by Scheduled Caste electors and the number of votes secured by each Scheduled Caste
candidate. This inevitably delayed the work.. Thirdly, the examination of these election
returns proved a very laborious task as the statistical tables given In the Appendices to
this book will show.
The
work thus lingered on. I regret very much this delay. For I know how much mischief has
been done by the Congress during the interval. The Congress has advertised the election
results to bolster up its claim to represent the Untouchables. The main point in the
advertisement is that out of 151 seats assigned to the Scheduled Castes the Independent
Labour Party which was organised by me got only 12 seats and the rest of the seats were
captured by the Congress. This mess is served out from the Congress kitchen as conclusive
proof to show that the Congress represents the Untouchables. This false propaganda seems
to have gone home in some quarters. Even a man like Mr. H. N. Brailsford has reproduced in
his 'Subject India' this absurd Congress version, without any attempt at verification and
with apparent acceptance of its truth. I am sure that the results of the elections as set
out in this book will hit the nail squarely on the head of this false propaganda. For, the
Congress version of the results of the election is an utter perversion. As a matter of
fact the results of 1937 Election conclusively disprove the Congress claim to represent
the Untouchables. Far from supporting the Congress version the results of the Election
show : (1) that out of 151 the Congress got only 78 seats; (2) that the Untouchables in
almost every constituency fought against the Congress by putting up their own candidates;
(8) that the majority of 78 seats won by the Congress were won with the help of Hindu
votes and they do not therefore in any way represent the Scheduled Castes ; and (4.) that
of 151 seats those won by the Congress in the real sense i.e., with the majority of votes
of the Scheduled Castes, were only 88. As to the Independent Labour Party it was started
in 1987 just a few months before the elections. It functioned only in the Province of
Bombay. There was no time to organise branches in other Provinces. Elections on the ticket
of the Independent Labour Party were fought only in the Province of Bombay and there the
Independent Labour Party for from being a failure obtained an astonishing degree of
success. Out of the 15 seats assigned to the Scheduled Castes in Bombay Presidency it
captured 18 and in addition it won 2 general seats. I am therefore glad that at long last
I have succeeded in completing the work which proves beyond the shadow of doubt that the
story that the Congress captured all the seats reserved for the Scheduled Castes and that
the Independent Labour Party was a failure, is a wicked lie. I trust that the book will
prove interesting and instructive for all those who are interested in the subject and who
desire to know the truth.
Before
closing this preface, I wish to express my gratitude to those from whom I have received
assistance in one form or another. I am grateful to the Provincial Governments for the
troubles they have taken in responding to my circular and sending me additional facts and
figures which I had called for. My thanks are also due to Mr. Karan Singh Kane, b.a., m.l.a., at one time, Parliamentary Secretary
in the U. P. Congress Government, for the help he has rendered in the most laborious task
of preparing the tables."
The
reader who reads the above preface and compares it with the table of contents will at once
find that the book deals with topics which lie far outside its boundary. The curious may
like to know how the foregoing part of the preface is related to the table of contents.
The explanation lies in the fact that the book in its present final form is quite
different from what it was in its original form. In its original form it covered in very
brief compass matter now dealt with on a vastly bigger scale in Chapters IV, V, VI, VII
and IX and the statistical appendices. The foregoing part of the preface belonged to the
book in its original form. That is why I have put it in inverted commas. The curious may
also like to know why the final form of the book came to be so different from the
original. The explanation is quite simple. The proofs of the book in its original form
were seen by a friend and co-worker. He was dissatisfied with the scope of the book and
insisted that it is not enough to deal with election results to expose the Congress claim
to represent the Untouchables, I must do more. I must expose the efforts of the Congress
and Mr. Gandhi to improve the lot of the Untouchables for the information of the
Untouchables and also of the foreigners whom the Congress had deluded into accepting its
side by misrepresentation of facts. Besides the difficulties arising out of the fact that
the book was already in proof form, this wan a tall order and appeared to be beyond me
having regard to other claims on my time. He would not, however, give way and I had
therefore to accept his plan. The original work which would have been about 75 pages in
print had to be completely recast and enlarged. The book in the present form is a complete
transformation. It records the deeds. of the Congress and Mr. Gandhi from 1917 to date in
so far as they touch the problem of the Untouchables. Much is written about the Congress,
far more about Mr. Gandhi. But no one has so far told the story of what they have done
about the Untouchables. Everyone knows that Mr. Gandhi values more his reputation as the
saviour of the Untouchables than his reputation as the champion of Swaraj or as the
protagonist of Akimsa At the Round Table Conference he claimed to be the sole champion of
the Untouchables and was not even prepared to share the honour with anyone else, I
remember what a scene he created when his claim was contested. Mr. Gandhi does not merely
claim for himself the championship of the Untouchables. He claims similar championship for
the Congress. The Congress, he says, is fully pledged to redress the wrongs done to the
Untouchables and argues that any attempt to give political safeguards to the Untouchables
is unnecessary and harmful. It is therefore a great pity that no detailed study of these
claims by Mr. Gandhi and the Congress has been undertaken so far.
With
the Hindus who have been blind devotees of Mr. Gandhi this study, although it is the first
of its kind, will not find favour: indeed it is sure to provoke their wrath. How can it be
otherwise when the conclusion arrived at is " Beware of Mr. Gandhi" ? Looking at
it from a wider point of view, there is no reason for the Hindus to be enraged about it.
The Untouchables are not the only community in India which thinks of Mr. Gandhi in these
terms. The same view of Mr. Gandhi is entertained by the Muslims, the Sikhs and the Indian
Christians. As a matter of fact, the Hindus should cogitate over the question and ask: why
no community trusts Mr. Gandhi although he has been saying that he is the friend of the
Muslims, Sikhs and the Scheduled Castes and what is the reason for this distrust ? In my
judgment, there cannot be a greater tragedy for a leader to be distrusted by everybody as
Mr. Gandhi is today. I am however certain that this is not how the Hindus will react. As
usual, they will denounce the book and call me names. But as the proverb says: "The
caravan must pass on, though the dogs bark." In the same way, I must do my duty, no
matter what my adversaries may have to say. For as Voltaire observed: Who writes the
history of his own time must expect to be attacked for everything he has said, and for
everything he has not said : but these little drawbacks should not discourage a man who
loves truth and liberty, expects nothing, fears nothing, asks nothing and limits his
ambition to the cultivation of letters."
The
book has become bulky. It may be said that it suffers by reason of over-elaboration and
even by repetition. I am aware of this. But I have written the book especially for the
Untouchables and for the foreigners. On behalf of neither could I presume knowledge of the
relevant facts. For the particular audience I have in view, it is necessary for me to
state both facts as well as arguments and pay no regard to the artistic sense or the
fastidious taste of a cultivated and informed class of readers.
As
it is my intention to make the book a complete compendium of information regarding the
movement of the Untouchables for political safeguards, I have added several appendices
other than those of statistical character. They contain relevant documents both official
and non-official which have a bearing upon the movement. Those who are interested in the
problem of the Untouchables will, I believe, be glad to have this information ready at
hand. The general reader may complain that the material in the Appendices is much too
much. Here again, I must state that the Untouchables are not likely to get the information
which to the general reader may be easily accessible. The test adopted is the need of the
Untouchables and not of the general reader.
One
last word. The reader will find that I have used quite promiscuously in the course of this
book a variety of nomenclature such as Depressed Classes, Scheduled Castes, Harijans and
Servile Classes to designate the Untouchables. I am aware that this is likely to cause
confusion especially for those who are not familiar with conditions in India. Nothing
could have pleased me better than to have used one uniform nomenclature. The fault is not
altogether mine. All these names have been used officially and unofficially at one time or
other for the Untouchables. The term under the Government of India Act is 'Scheduled
Castes.' But that came into use after 1985. Before that they were called 'Harijans"
by Mr. Gandhi and 'Depressed Classes' by Government. In a flowing situation like that it
is not possible to fix upon one name, which may be correct designation at one stage and
incorrect at another. The reader will overcome all difficulties if he will remember that
these terms are synonyms and represent the same class.
I
am grateful to Professor Manohar Chitnis for the preparation of the Index and to Mr. S. C.
Joshi for help in correcting the proofs.
B.
R. AMBEDKAR.
24th June 1945.
22, Prithviraj Road,
New Delhi.