The Nehru Report and Muslim Rights

Page 1

Ub e 1Rebtu=1Re por t an b muslin t lRfgbts •

Page 2

I l i s 1- lolin e s s l--iaz rat Mi r z a R C\ 5 hir.,ud/D i n Mahrn ud Ahrn ad , l\ I m I I fat u I M c1...,\ h l I , a nd I ma m o f t h e Ahr n , 1 d l y y a Commu n i t y.

Page 3

�'Hon1e-rule can nerer be of benefit to lndirt unless it be of a federal fypr/· (p.lb').

Page 4

BY His Holiness Hazrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad.I KH.ALIFATUL-MASIH II, AND IMAM OF THE AHM.ADIYYA CO�IMUNITY.Published by SHER ALI, B.A.Secretary to His Holine.�s the Khalifatul-.1/asih II, for Literature & Research }Vork, Qadian.{ Indian Re.1/· PRICE: English ls.6d.•

Page 5

First Published through the ,:...\.1-lf azr· (l�rdu) at Qadian in October & :N 0Ye1nbcr LRDU Edition Re-printed f ron1 the..,�...\l-Fazr·..X0Yen1l>er ,, 2nd Edition..•...Dece111bcr BEXGALI Translatiop first pnblishe BEXGALI Edition Re-printed EXGLISH Edition ,vith the Snpplcruent J)ece1nber 1928.�\pril 1�)30.Printed by S.K.Dutt M.Sc., at the Protiva Press, 38-2, Wellington Street, Calcutta.

Page 6

FOREWORD.rrhis revie" T of the Xehru-Report b y His Holiness Hazrat iiirza Bashir-ncl-I)in }[alunnd....-\hn1ad, the Khalifatnl-1Iasih II, and I1na1n of the....-\lnnadiyya Conununity, Qadian, ,vas origina.11\� ,vritten au l pub]i,h ecl in Urdn inunediately after the publication of the Sehrn- Report...A..n English translation of the re,�ie"· i� no,v being placed before the public for the :fir,r ti 1 ne.'l'his n1ay appear to be uncalled for in Yi ,r of th fact that by the adoption of the Indep ndenc Resolntion, the Congress ha� apparently �heh� d th....�ebru-Report for p:oocl.Bnt unl ·:--:-- th principl � nnderlying the Xehrn-Repnrt are r pudiated and th report rejected on it.n10rit�: ther- --an b no real prospect of peace in the future lii�tory of India.....\ nd that is what this re-vie,v principally ai1n� nt.His Holiness tho I(halifatnl-l\fa�ih ha� also recentlv ,vritten a Supplen1ent to hi"' orig·inal R eYie,v v ,vhich is included at the encl of thi� book.QADIA�, n-B-1930.SHER ALI.Secretary to His Holinrs.� the Khalifatul-Jlasih II for Literature and Research Trork.

Page 7

CONTENTS.CHAPTER I.:Subjec t s P ag r.D i d the Nehru Committee r epresent A l l - In d i a ? All-Muslim Parties confe r en ce a t Si m l a.CHAPTER II.Muslim Demand s 2.Demands of the Lahore Mus1im l.e agu e A Federa l Government.- p eoi a l Rep r e se n tation.-So parat e Electo r a t e -.W.F.Provinces.-Minorities Lan gu a g e.- F r e e d o m o f Religiou s Belie f.an d Propa gan d a.-Tb e Constitution and Amendme n t the r e o f.1 3 3.Demands of the (:a]cutta Muslim League...2 0 CHAPTER 111.4.Muslim Demands in the Nehru Re port • • • Form of Government.- S pecial Rep r e s e n ta tion.-Sep arate Electorate.-N.W.F.Provinces, Beluchistan and Si.iidh.-Th e Lang u ag e Question.- F r eedom o f R e l i g i o u s Belief and Propag anda.-Am e n dm e n t o f the Constitution.

Page 8

..11 Subjects CHAPTER IV.5.Can Details be left over till the Attainment of Dominion Status What is Dominion Status.-The Mussal mans and the Conncils.-The use of Force.The Help of Foreign Powers.-British Intervention not Possible.CHAPTER V.6.Do Minorities Need Special La\VS ? Causes of Friction hetween Majorities and Minorities.-Proteotion of Minorities in · Europe -Mere Uniformity of Laws is no sufficient safeguard for Muslims.-No Pro tection of Minorities in· the Nehru-Report.CHAPTER VI.7.Muslim Demands and the Nehru-Report Pages (Detailed study) 7 0· The Need for Special Safe-guards.CHAPTER VII.8.Demand for a Federal Government ( Detailed Study-contd.)...••• S-t- Fate of Muslim Majorities in Bengal and the Punjab.-Avantages of Federal Govern m'ent.-Federal Government not detrimental to any Community.-Federal Government no Bar to Progress.·•-Form of Federal Government in India.

Page 9

111 CHAPTER VIII.Subjects Pages 9.Demand for three N e\v Muslim Provinces (Detailed Study-contd.)......97 IO.Muslim Demand Reasonable.-M uslim Demand infringes Nobody's Right -Political Aspect of the Demand.CHAPTER IX.Reservation of Seats on Population (Detailed Study-contd.)...Basi::- Safe-guard Impossible Without Reservation.-Nehru Committee's Objections.-District Board Elections.-A Wrong Study of Figures.-Hindu Indifference to District Board Elections.CHAPTER X.106 1 r.Muslim Representation in the Central Government (Detailed Study-contd.)...143 Increased Representation involves no In- justice to Others.-Allotments of Seats not Difficult.CHAPTER XI.12.Separate Electorate (Detailed Study-contd.) 154 Separate Electorate Not a Cause of Commu- nal Tension.

Page 10

lV CHAPTER XII.Subjects I 3.Protection of Culture and Study-contd.) Religion ( Detailed ••• Pr0per Enforcement of Law.-•Future of Great Britain.-Amendment of the Consti tution.I 4.Duty Before us CHAPTER XIII....Right of Franchise.-Foreign Relations.The Jumaa.-The Muslim Law.-High Court Judges.-N ative States.SUPPLEMENT.I 5.A brief revievv of the Suppletnentary Report Pages 160 ,,..IOQ...of the N ehru-Com1nittee......I 8 I ERRATUM.For the word "there" at page 74 in line 10 read "later on"

Page 11

U:be 1Hebru==1Rcport anb flDusli 1n 1Rtobts In !he na,110 of.Jllal,, the Beneficent, the J,{erciful.He alcnc is the Helper.CHAPTER I.Did the Nehru Committee Represent All-India? � HE first question we have to ask in dealing with the Report is • ·was the Nehru Committee a representa tive body and are its deliberations entitled to the same consideration as the report of an All-India Committee?'' And the answer is furnished by the Report itself.It is abundantly clear from the Report that the aforesaid com mittee is not in any sense entitled to be regarded as a body representative of the country.From the Report it appears that All-Parties Confer ence at Bombay appointed this Committee on May 19, J 928; and what this self-styled All-Parties Conference was, and how it came into being, may be further read in the Report itself.The Report says that in view of the increasing difference between the Hindus and the.Muslims, the Na tional Congress which met in Gauhati in December, 1926, Passed a resolution calling upon '' the Working Com mittee to take immediate steps in consultation with Hindμ and Mussalman leaders to devise means for the remov�l of the present deplorable differences between Hindus

Page 12

l 2 l a n d M u s s a l m ans, a n d to submit their rep ort to the All India C on g r e s s C o m m ittee not later than the 31st March, 1927." In c o m p l i an c e with these directions the Working C o m m i t t ee h e l d c onfe r ence s with Hindu and Muslim le a de r s.On t h e 20th M arc h , 1927 , some prominen t M u s l i m l e a d e r s m et to g eth e r in Delh i and pu t forward c er t a i n p r o po s a l s f or the solution o f the Hindu-Muslim d i ff er e nc es , t h e s um an d substance o f Y1hich was tha t t h e M u s s a l m a n s wer e p r e pared t o a gree to joint electo r - a t e s , pro v i ded : (i ) S i n d was mad e int o a sep arat e province.(i i) T h e N.W.F.P r ovinces ard Baluchistan wer e t r e a t e d on the same footin g as the other pro -.v1 n c es.(ii i ) I n t h e Punj a b and Ben ga l the pro po rtion o f r e p r esen t a ti on wa s i n accordance with th e p o pu l a ti o n.(i v) I n t h e C en t ra l Le gi s lature Muslim represent a- - ti on w a s n o t to be les s than one-third.I mm e di at e l y a ft e r t h e publication of th the Congr e s s W o r k i n g Co mm ittee in re cord;d i ts appr e c i a t i o n o f t he ca th e M us s a lma n s to wal" d s the -.l'I- tdftite a n d esp JfeS ae d th e l i ope - -� the • proposa l s, a ra p p t.o c h e m en t � mi ght be e ff ecte d.La t er in JA.y I W o �kin s � m i t tee met apin pro 1> os als t,f *- M>l•• 1 t ie n in • ;r�th• �JI\P l � o t m tJJP.Co ur • •• C o pJpl i - � ' � a q]u.ti o n - b i8 1 i -ht......� · ,d.\.11!1!1.n;• Co

Page 13

[ 3 ] tion with other political parties and councillors, draft.a Swaraj Constitution and that in the preparation thereof it should invite suggestions from all the political, labour, commercial, and communal organisations.The Congress was shortly followed by the Liberal Federation which in a resolution, in addition to expressing its approval of the Moslem proposals, proposed a joint conference of the representatives of all communities to be called immediate ly in order to arrive at a settlement in the light of the Mos�em proposals.After this the Muslim League also in a meeting resolved that the League Council should ap point a sub-committee to co-operate with the Congress Working Committee in drafting a constitution for India in which the interest of the Muslim community will have been adequately safeguarded.While the Liberal Federation and the Muslim League passed the aforesaid resolutions, the Congress Working Committee, as directed by the Congr,�ss, invited to a con ference various bodies, of which the All-India Muslim League and the Khilafat Committee were the only two Muslim organiastions as against four Parsee Associations and three States' Subjects' Conferences.According to the Nehru-Report, most of these bodies sent their dele gates and the conference which was held at Delhi, lasted from 12th February till the 22nd of the same month.The MusJim League Council hastened to signify its disap proval of the resolutions passed at the Joint Conference, and thus the All-Parties Conference ceased to be re presentative of India and became a purely Hindu body.The Leagu•� Council went a step further.In another resolution it insisted that its delegates should press the representatives of various organisations to accept the Calcutta League Resolutions, and it explicitly laid down � hat the delegates should, before taking part in the fram ing of the constitution, report to the Council the progress

Page 14

[ 4 ] made in this direction.Thus, the League in a plain rnanner debarred its representatives from taking part in the committee that had undertaken to frame a constitu tion for India.The Nehru-Report admits that this deci sion of the Muslim League Council placed the Nehru Committee in a difficult position inasmuch as the dele gates of the League, in view of the resolutions t could not take part in the deliberation upon the report unless and until the resolutions of the League had been accepted in full, or unless the Council itself had issued instructions anew.Under the circumstances, the All-Parties Confer ence had to re-assemble on March 8,-the persons attend ing the meeting have not been mentioned in the report and two sub-committees were f ormed,-one to consider the question of the separation of Sindh, and the other to investigate the question of representation.The report of the committee appointed on the 22nd February could not be taken up for consideration be cause the delegates of the Muslim League refused point blank to discuss it.The conference, thereupon, ordered its publication and adjourned its sitting till 19th May, 1928.During this time the Hindu Mahasabha met in April and vehemently opposed certain demands of the Muslim League.The All-Parties Conference again met in Bombay on May 19, but as the conditions prevailing hardly warranted a unanimous decision, it was proposed to form a small sub-committee to investigate the problems.Accordingly a sub-committee, consisting of Sir Ali Imam and Mr.Shuaib Kureishy (Muslims), Messrs.Annie and Jayakar (Hindu Mahasabha), Mr.Pardhan (Brahmins), Sardar Mangal Singh (Sikhs), Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru (Liberals), Mr.Joshi (Labour ), Mr.S.C.Bose and Pandit l\tlotilal Nehru, ( nine in all-7 Hindus and 2 Muslims ) was duly constituted.From the report it appears that

Page 15

[ 5 ] Sir Ali Imam for reasons of health could not be present at more than one sitting.Thus, Mr.Shuaib Kureishy was left alone to represent the Moslem interests.The facts related above have been quoted from the Nehru-Report itself.As regards others of a more secret nature, I need take no notice.They are receiving due publicity at the hands of some Muslim Leaders.The facts I have chosen to advert to are sufficient for my pur pose.They are sufficient to prove that the Nehru Com mittee did not represent the whole of India.It consisted merely of a handful of men assembled at their own sweet will, most of them self-styled leaders.Neither were all the provinces represented, nor all the different communities.As an instance I might easily cite the case of our own community.Throughout these negotiations our community was never consulted although our com munity though small in number yet far exceeds the Parsees in numerical strength, and commands an All India status.We possess powerful organisations in at least three provinces, namely, Bengal, the Punjab and N.W.F.Provinces, in addition to a fairly big population in Behar, the U.P., Madras, and Sindh ; while smaller numbers may be found aU over the country.Above all, we are an organised people, and yield not even to the foremost Hindu Associations in India in the matter of registered membership and organisation.The members of the All-Parties Conference will in vain plead that we are only a religious community.True, our community has the same platform both for religion and politics, and finds the arrangement more effective, but that is no reason why we should have been deprived of our legi...timate rights.But for the time, let us leave alone the case of our community.The actua1 work of the Nehru Committee began some where in 1928, some time after the Muslim League had

Page 16

[ 6 ] split up into two divisions-the Lahore, and the Calcutta Sections.From the Nehru--Report, it does not appear that efforts were made to secure the representation of the Lahore Section nor is it in evidence anywhere that any ' attempt was made to seek the co-operation of the pro- vincial branches of the League, while as a matter of fact the communal problem assumes hideous proportions only in questions relating to the provinces and not to the country as a whole.Therefore, the participation even of both the sections of the League could not have been deemed adequate.The conclusion is obvious.The so called All-Parties Conference could not justify its name, so long as all view-points were not fully represented on it.The Nehru Scheme proposes two Houses of Parlia ment for India, one chamber to consist of representatives elected by the people directly and the other, the Senate, to consist, after that of the United States of America, of members representing the different Provincial Councils.Strange that the committee while upholding the principle of having two such representative bodies for the enact� ment of laws affecting transitory and minor interests, should in the matter of formulating a constitution for the country overlook the need for consulting the representa tives of the Provincial Moslem Leagues so as to give them an opportunity to present their respective view points.The All-Parties Conference could not pretend ignorance of the fact that the majority of several of the Provincial Leagues was at variance with the majority of the Central Body of the League in matters of vital im portance.How c·ould then the inclusion of the representatives of the Central Body alone be reason..ably regarded as adequate to help to formulate the draft constitution? Take, for example, the case of any of these provinces, the Punjab, the United Province, Bengal, the

Page 17

7 j.\V.F.Prov in s or Sinclh.in each of whjch th lVlosl 1ns hold vi "W nJat ing lo th sysl<..n1 of joint • � c to1 nte contra1y lo thos" of th,, Calcutta L agu.} low could tlu: n the (�alcnt ta L agu • b consid red, und ·r the Cll'Ctnnstnncc�, to S{"l"V<.a� th ir r pres nlative? ·r1,.\11-1 a1ties (�onf ercnct.if it ai ail 1n ant lo justify its bonafidcs, should hnv invit d all the different Provincial C'.on11uitteL'S asking th n1 in un quivoca1 t rrns to s nd not only such 1nen1bcrs as repr sented th opinions of the 1najority but as well as those, who had to urg th 1ninority vic,-v-points, so as to enable the conferenc to dispassionately arrive at some decisions after having taken a full consensus of public opinion.But the con veners of this Conference-a handful of gentle1n n pledged to proportionate representation-chose out for in vitation the few bodies already agreed to the 1-lindu vi w point, i.e..the principles of joint representation.Of all the various associations whose na1n�s app ar on pages 20 and 21 of the Nchru-R.cport, th< 1- re is not on body belonging to the oppo�itc carnp.lt may be declared without fear of contradiction that the quaint procedure adopted.nnn1t�ly, that of leaving severally alone an overwhchning rnajority of the Mussal n1ans, a1nply proves that the All-Parties Conference, if it at all represented any peopl'=', represented only that section of the population which was in favour of joint electorate system.ALL-MUSLIM PARTIES CONI.- ERENCE AT SIMLA.T'he All-Muslim Parties Conference, held last year at Simla-a fact conveniently glossed over by the Nehru Comrnittee,-throws additional side-light on this important issue.That committee preferred to take notice only of

Page 18

[ 8 ] the Muslim Leaders' Conference held at Delhi, as a result of which the memorable Delhi proposals accepting joint electorates subject to certain reservations, were tentative ly formulated.But it very conveniently omitted to refer to what transpired at Simla where the Muslim Leaders called an All�lndia Muslim Conference to place the Delhi proposals before the community.The facts, however.were that when the D·elhi proposals, that accepted the joint electorate subject to certain reservations, provoked a good deal of adverse criticism in the country, our leaders realised that the bulk of the Moslem opinion was against such overtures.About this time was held a meeting of the Hindu Mahasabha at Nagpur, and 1\/Ir.Kelkar as President delivered a speech so bitterly hostile to Muslim demands that it made many of the l\1uslim leaders realise their mistake.Thereupon the IVloslem League convened, in September, 1927, at Simla, a meet ing of the representatives of all the I\tluslim Parties, whether members of the League or not.,I too received an invitation and although, as a rule, I keep aloof from such gatherings, but happening at this instance to be on the spot in connection with the Anti--Blasphemy Bill.I attended the conference.From what I gathered from the discussions that ranged for full two days in support of the separate electorate, I can safely say that if votes were taken, a clear majority of 70 per cent.would have carried the day in favour of communal representation.Of those, favouring the joint electorate system, most agreed that although their personal inclinations were for it, their community, no doubt t stood solidly for the other system.All Mr.Jinnah" s efforts failed to persuade the representatives of different pro..vinces and associations to abandon the system of separate representation.Mr.Jinnah (who was the president of the meeting·) at last declined to put the matter to vote saying

Page 19

[ 9 ] that the assembly was no regular association, but he as sured the members that though personally he was in favour of joint representation, he was now fully aware that his community viewed the matter quite differently, and that when the time to arrive at a settlement with the Hindus comes, he would not omit to present to them the majority view.The scene was not without its moral.This conference, which was composed of people re presenting all shades of thought, sat to deliberate upon the Delhi proposals which were, by far the least objec tionable, and the nearest as a compromise, to the general Muslim opinion, as compared to the Madras Congres� re solutions or the Nehru-Report, both of which came into being much later ; and yet a powerful majority of the representatives of different Muslim bodies would have nothing to do with them.Nay, even from among the authors of the proposals persons like Sir l\1uhammad Shafi turned to discountenance them.It may now be pertinently asked that when it had become evident that a clear majority of the Muslim community disfavoured the sys�em of joint representation, why the All-Parties Conference chose to shut them out of its deliberations? If it failed to invite them, its pretensions to represent all shades of opinion held no ground.And if it invited them and its invitation evoked no response, then it was evident that the major sections of an important Indian community had no confidence in the conference and would not care even to attend its sitting.No sane person would, under the circumstances, consider this All-Parties Con ference to be the representative of All-India.But from the facts, quoted above from the Nehru Report, it would appear that the All-Parties Con ference did not properly represent even that section of the Muslim opinion which found utterance in the Calcutta

Page 20

[ 10 ] Muslim League ; for this Report has confessed that the Calcutta League had issued instructions to its members that unless its resolutions had been first accepted, they were not to join the Committee's deliberations.The question arises, did the Calcutta League ever revoke this decision? From the Report it does not appear that it ever did.Does it not follow then that the Leaguers served on the sub-committee, formed in pursuance of the Bombay Conference Resolution, not in conformity to but in defiance of the same instructions, which laid strong emphasis on an unqualified acceptance of the Calcutta Resolutions by the Nehru Committee, as a condition pre cedent to their participation in any deliberation connected with the constitutional question? No meeting of the League was held to reverse the decision during or after the Bombay Conference.How could then the members of the League go out of their way and act contrary to their explicit instructions? Here again the question arises,-did the Nehru Committee fully accept the Calcutta League proposals? They have themselves admitted that they did not ( vide the Nehru Report, p.25 ).The Muslim delegates also admit the same.How could then the representatives of the League in justice to the League's decision, sit and work conjointly ,vith the committee? And if inspite of the League's inscruction3 they did not withdraw from the Nehru Committee after it had given its verdict against the Calcutta proposals they had ipso /acto ceased to be delegates of the League.The inference is clear that the Nehru Committee did not represent even that section of the League which is under the presidency of Mr.Jinnah, and hence it remained all the more unrepresented by the Muslims.And this is perhaps what led lv1essrs.Muhammad Y akub, Shaukat Ali, Hasrat Mohani, Shafi

Page 21

[ 1 t ] Daudi, and so many other prominent Muslim leaders and Khilafatists to oppose the Nehru Committee.The reason, why I choose to dwell on the point in detail, is because I feel pained to see millions of Indians being driven in this matter like so many dum� cat �le_ A handf, ll of people assembles here or there and publishes their decisions in glaring headlines as the pro nouncements of the Leaders of the Nation.No one steps out and raises his little finger in protest and asks '' \v'h0 made you our leaders?'' Perhaps nowhere under the sun are the people at large treated with so much humi liation, indignity and contempt.It is assumed that the country is the property of a noisy few, at liberty to deal with it as they like to do.My as·:onishment knew no bounds when at the last Unity Conference I noticed soree of the gentlemen assembled there, actually upbraiding the rest for their not showing due regard to the:r leaders meaning their own worthy-selves.Several times I felt impelled to ask, '� Well sir, who made those gentlemen the leaders of the rest? '' But the dictates of propriety restrained me.I, however, did avail myself of the occa sion and delivered in Simla a lecture on the subject and drew attention to the deplorable conditions obtaining in our country.These attributed not to a lack of leaders but to a dearth of fol1owers.I said that in our country every body who dabbles in politics, assumes the role of a leader, whether or not, there is a fallowing to be counted upon.Prior to this on the occasion of the arrival of the Simon Commission, I had suggested the formation of Moslem Associations in every town and village, com prising of members of every shade of opinion, in order to serve as media for the ventilation of collective views and Prevent the noisy few from passing off their own views as the public opinion of the Mussalmans.•

Page 22

[ 12 J But to revert to the subject, I once again challenge the pretensions both of the All-Parties Conference and of the Nehru Committee, and assert that neither the forrner was the representative of All-India Muslim public nor the latter of any section of it.The first was a conference of men of a particular shade of opinion and it appointed a committee from which Moslem representatives were practically excluded.lt was this committee which published a report which now passes by the name of an All-India Committee Report.It may, however, be urged that it is immaterial whether the conference or the corn mittee or both were representative bodies or not, and that what it really matters is the report itself.If the report pays due regard to the legitimate rights of all com munities, there is no reason why it should be rejected.Cer tainly not.I would gladly accept it if it would answer that description.But before entering into a consideration of the merits of the Report I cannot help saying that the mutual distrust, which has been the main cause of the present Hindu-Muslim tension, is not likely to abate and would rather be aggravated at the thought that while, in framing a constitution for the country, no regard has been paid to the question of Moslem representation, what chance is there of Moslem feelings be�ng respected, when local laws will come to be enacted in future.Now as the report is before us, let us proceed to examine both its merits and its demerits.Its perusal, however, I am grieved to confess, leaves me sorely dis appointed.I am led to the conclusion that the scheme, expounded by the committee, cannot be of any b,�nefi.t to the country.At any rate, it spells disaster for the Mussalmans.

Page 23

CH APTER II.MUSLIM DEMANDS.Demands of the Lahc're Muslim League._6 EFORE discussing the proposals made in the Nehru-- Report I propose to deal' with the demands of the Muslim community-what these are and why they are made.I have already stated that there are from the politi cal point of view two parties among the Muslims.Of these two groups, the party consisting mostly of the Punjab and U.P.Muslims holds, as their fundamental demands, that, in framing a future constitution for India.the following essentials must be kept in view :- 1.-A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.Their first demand is that the Government of the country should be of the federal type, i.e., the provinces should enjoy complete autonomy.Whenever and to whatever extent Britain waives her authority, the same should be given over to the various provinces.But since it is necessary to have a central organisation for the general administration of the country, subjects of com mon interest should be delegated to the Central Indian Government by the provinces.This will mean that the Central Government shall not delegate certain powers to th_e Provinces but on the contrary, in order to run an 1 organised Government, the Provinces shall delegate certain powers to the Central Government.If this principle be accepted and adopted in India as it has been _successfully

Page 24

[ 14 ] tried and followed in the United States of America, Switzerland South Africa and Australia, it will give us , ' a Central Indian Government administering foreign affairs, national defence, posts, telegraphs and customs depart ments only, the rest being dealt with by the Provincial Councils according to local needs, the Central Govern ment having neither the power nor the right to interfere in such matters.The reason why the Mussalmans advocate a federal type of Government, is that they want every community to have full scope for progress, and that the Mussalmans where they are in a majority, should not be the victims of intervention by the Central Indian Government in which the Hindu element is bound to preponderate.Supposing that a federal type of Government did not exist in India, the progress of Bengal, or the Punjab, or Sindh for instance, where the Mussalmans are in a majority, will always be liable to be interfered with by the Central Indian Government who may at any time find fault with the int�rnal administration of those provinces and in consequence withdraw certain privileges, supersede certain laws, and thus render the majority impotent and powerless.This is not a baseless fear for even the Nehru-Report itself has aggravated it.For the com mittee in discussing the question of the separation of Sindh, observes :- '' We suspect that the real opposition to separation is not due to any high national considerntions but to grosser economic considerations ; to the fear of the Hindus that their economic position might suffer if Muslims had

Page 25

r 1 s 1 the charge of affairs in a separated area.We are sure that this fear is baseless.Among all the people of India the Hindus of Sindh are perhaps the most enterprising and adventurous.The traveller meets them in the four quarters of the world, carrying on prosperous businesses and enriching their people at home by their earnings abroad.No one can take away this spirit of adventure and enterprise from the Hindus of Sind and so long as they have it their future is assured.It must be remem bered also that the powers of a Provincial Government are limited and there is the central Government which has power in all important departments." (Nehru-Report, page 32.) From a comparison of the observations quoted above with the remarks made by the Nehru Committee in deal ing with similar fear on the part of the I\lloslems, one can easily imagine what sort of sympathy will be accord ed to the Mussalmans.For while it has betrayed so much solicitude and regard in respect of the Hindu mis apprehension, it had dealt with the Muslim fear in the same report in the following strain:- ,' A new comer to India looking at thes,� figures and the strength of the Muslim community, would probably imagine that it was strong enough to look after itself and required no special protection or spoon feeding.'' In other words while the susceptibilities of the l\llussal...mans hardly deserved any consideration at the hands of of compilers of this report, an injury to the feelings of the Hindus was a collossal sin.Apart from this, the authors of the report, as is clear from the above-quoted

Page 26

[ 16 ] text, assure the Hindus that their fears regarding Muslim majority, are absolutely unfounded when they ( the Nehruites) will be there to overlord it in the Central Government, and ready to intervene whenever the econo mic supremacy of the Hindus is placed in danger.Though the words are guarded, yet reading between the lines, the presumption grows clear that the Central Gov ernment has reserved for itself powers simply in order to safeguard Hindu interests.We ourselves do not favour the idea of trampling upon other people's rights, but we suspect that the Central Government will not be content with merely intervening when Hindu interests are actually jeopardised in Muslim Provinces, but that by its undue interference it will hamper the progress of those pro vinces, and prevent them from adopting measures condu..cive to a healthy development, just as in the past certain European Powers stood in the way of the Turks' pro gress.But this is not the only reason.Commonsense suggests that the vastness of India, its diversity of r�li gious persuasions, tongues and culture, make it essential that each province should progress independently.t-Iome rule can never be of benefit to India unless it be of a federal type.Such a type of Government is b�' no means a novel experiment.It has been successfuliy adopted by the United States of America, the wealthiest and most formidable power in the world.So μiuch, h9w ever, must be guaranteed by enactment that no province shall have the right to break off from the Central Body.When an understanding to the effect has been given by each province, there will no longer exist for India that fear of being partitioned into divisions as faced the United States once upon a time.

Page 27

[ 17 ] IL-SPECIAL REPRESENTATIO.T.In its second demand this Muslim party urges the acceptance of the principle that in apportioning repre sentation to the various communities, the weak minorities should in their respective provinces be allotted seats more than they would be entitled to on the basis of popu lation so as to embrace the various opinions and inter ests ; while in provinces where minorities are strong enough to hold their own, their representation should be restricted to their proportion in the population and thus preclude the possibility of a majority being rendered into a minority.Accordingly in the Punjab and Bengal the representation of each community will be proportionate to its numerical strength, because if the Muslim majority which is only 55 and 54 per cent.respectively, were made to forego some of its seats for the Hindus or the Sikh cs, it is liable to be reduced into a minority, with the result that the Hindu element will preponderate in the admin istration.On the contrary in the U.P., Behar, Bombay, Madras, and C.P.where the population is predominantly Hindu and minorities form a very small proportion, they should, according to the principle ennunciated above get more seats than they are entitled to by virtue of their numbers, so that their different sections may have oppor tunities for representation.The Hindus by this arrange ment do not lose anything at all, their preponderating majority remaining unaltered.In the same way in the N.W.F.Provinces, Baluchistan and Sindh, where Mussal mans have an overwhelming majority, the Hindus should be given more seats than they are entitled to according to their numerical strength so that all their interests might be fully represented.

Page 28

[ 18 ] Alongside of this, another demand relates to the re presentation of Muslims on the Central Legislature.,It is urged that the Muslims who constitute one-fourth of the population should, so long as their numerical strength does not increase to one--third of the population, be given one--third of seats in the Central Legislature, but when their population grows to or exceeds one-third of the whole, then seats should be allotted to them on popula tion basis.III.-SEPARATE ELECTORATE.The third demand is that until mutual confidence between the Hindus and the Muslims has been restored, separate electorate system should be retained in all the provinces, or at least in Bengal and the Punjab, where Muslims are only in a small ,:najority, so that representa tives of the Muslims should be such in the truest sense of the word, and not mere puppets working against Moslem interests under the influence of the Hindus.IV.-N.W.F.PROVINCES AND BALUCHISTAN.The fourth demand relates to the extension of Repre sentative Government to the N.W.F.Provinces and Baluchistan, and the constitution of Sindh into a separate province with a legislature responsible to the people.V.-MINORITY's LANGUAGE.The fifth demand stresses the necessity of complete non-intervention on the part o-f the majority community in respect of the language or the script of the minority, and when a minority desires to keep its tongue alive, to make

Page 29

l 19 l it obligatory on the part of Government to provide facili ties for the teaching of the same in local educational institutions.Yl.-FREEDOM OF RELIGIOUS BELIEF AND PROPAGANDA.The sixth demand emphasises the necessity of Gov ernment's scrupulous non-interference in matters pertain ing to religion and the propagation thereof.It should neither impose restrictions on conversions nor should it have any right to pass such legislation as is likely to ad versely affect the culture or economic position of any community, as for instance, a law regulating cow slaughter must be passed only when three-fifths of the members of the community affected by it are in support of the same.VIL-THE CONSTITUTION AND AMENDMENT THEREOF.In addition to the above I have been repeatedly urging a seventh demand namely that the above-men tioned rights should be embodied in the constitution, and it should be provided that the constitutional law should not undergo any alteration unless and until two-thirds of the elected members should vote in support of the pro posed change.Nor should this be considered sufficient.The same majority of elected members must support such a proposal in three consecutive councils before it is passed into law.And when the proposed changes directly affect any particular community at least two thirds of the members representing the same must in three consecutive councils approve of the proposed changes before the same should be placed on the statute.

Page 30

[ 20 ] Further more, the enacted measures should be enforced only in the province or provinces, two--thirds of the repre sentatives whereof had voted for such enactment.Unless such safeguards were provided the Hindus will be at any time in a position, by virtue of their overwhelming majority, to amend, modify or alter the laws and repeal all the protective measures which, while framing a consti tution for India, they would adopt in order to win over their Muslim partners.Demands of the Calcutta Muslim League.The Calcutta Muslim League, which the Nehru Com mittee claims to represent while favouring the idea of its delegates working conjointly with the Congress in draft ing a constitution for India enjoined upon them to keep..1n view: ( 1) that Sindh should be constituted into a separate and autonomous province ; (2) that the Reforms should be introduced in the N.W.F.Provinces and Baluchistan and they should be given the same rights as the other provinces ; (3) that under the present circumstances, the reten tion of separate electorate system in the different provinces is imperative for the protection of Muslim rights, and Muslims cannot forego the same until Sindh is constituted into a separate and autonomous province and the Reforms are introduced in Baluchistan and the N.W.F.Provinces.And only after the fulfilment of these conditions, the Muslims would be prepared to replace the separate elec torate by the joint-electorate system provided that the

Page 31

[ 2 l ] representation of the different comn1unities is fixed on the basis of population excepting in the follo,ving cases :- ( a) l\ luslims in N.\V.F.ProYinces.Baluchistan, and Sindh.\\7ill concede to the Hindus repre sentation over and aboYe their legitimate number in exactly the same "·ay as the Hindus ,,,ill concede to the iVluslims in pro vinces ,.vhere they are in a majority.(b) In the Central Government, l\ Iussaln1ans ,,·ill not have representation less than they have at present.In addition to this the League accepted the �1adras resolution of the Congress regarding freedom of opinion, laws affecting religion, cow and music.and incorporated the same in its above-mentioned resolution.It is true that some of the points ,vhich find promin ence in the demands of the other party of the i\ 1 Iuslims have been omitted by the Calcutta League.This ho'\vever does not prove that the Calcutta League is opposed to these demands.For example, the demand for a federal type of Government is not to be found in the Calcutta League resolution.A glance over the speeches delivered on the occasion is, however, sufficient to convince one of the fact that the members of the Calcutta League, were proceeding on the assumption that provinces will be completely autonmous.This will be clear from the following words of Maulana Abul Kala;tn Azad:- '' There would now be nine Hindu Provinces against five Muslim Provinces, and whatever treatment Hi n d us accorded in the nine Provinces, Muslim would accord th e

Page 32

[ 22 ] same treatment to Hindus in five provinces.Was not this a great gain? Was not a new weapon gained for the assertion of Muslim rights?" ( Civil & Military Gazette, 2nd Jan., /928, p.3, Col.4 ).The above passage shows that Maulana Abul Kalam Azad had clearly in his mind that the provinces would enjoy complete autonomy, or else, how could the Muslims be said to have a new weapon in their hands if complete control rested with the Central Government having full power to interfere in matters provincial.A Central Government with a Hindu element preponderating, could at any time interfere with the affairs of the Moslem pro vinces ; an indication of which might be found in the tacit assurance given by the compilers of the report to the Sindh Hindus.Similarly, the question of language is another point not touched by the Calcutta League.Jts silence should not be taken to mean that it attached no weight to the question.It was silent because the Con gress had once finally settled the question and accepted Hindustani or Urdu as the national tongue, both Persian and Nagri scripts being permissible.The Calcutta League had assumed that what the Congress had once decided and agreed to, the Nehru Committee would not overrule.In short, although the Calcutta League in its resolu tion had omitted certain points, yet this fact should not at all lead one to conclude that it was opposed to the Lahore League in respect thereof.The difference existed only over the demand of the Lahore League ( J} for the separa tion of certain provinces as a matter of right, and (2) for the retention of separate electorates so long as the Muslims

Page 33

[ 23 ] could not trust the Hindus and were not convinced that the latter would not use their wealth and infiuence /or the destruction o/ the former.Save this, there is hardly any fundamental difference of opinion between the two sections of the League.lVlr.Jinnah, the central figure in the Calcutta League and who was also its moving spirit, had gauged l\luslim opinion on the occasion of the All f\luslim Conference held in Simla, and was conscious of the fact that the bulk of his community was opposed to his viewpoint, and was in favour of the Lahore section.In his speech he made the following remarks :- • ' We have got a majority in this house but shall we bf:' able to carry a majority in the country? ( Voices., '{ es n).Nothing will please 1ne more but at the same time it will be fair to say that I am not so sure that I am satisfied that the m�jority of Mussalmans throughout the country are in favour of it." ( Civil & Military Gazette, 2nd Jan., 1928, p.3, Col.4 ).

Page 34

CH A PT ER III.MUSLIM DEMANDS IN THE NEHRU-REPORT.7{ have stated the demands of the Muslim community � and have also shown wherein lies the differ ences between the two Moslem groups over the consti tutional issue.I have also shown that of the two Muslim parties the Calcutta section of the League is more dis posed towards the Hindu viewpoint.But even this group has stated in clear words that unless the Muslim demands have been satisfied in full, the Muslims cannot co-operate in framing any Swaraj scheme.This plainly means that these demands are not to be considered as the basis for Hindu-l\1uslim unity, but their acceptance is a condition precedent to negotia tions for unity.The Lahore section of the League is entirely in agreement with the other group in these demands, and in fact it cannot be expected to be content with anything less, when it actually insists on something more.Now I proceed to elucidate the findings of the Nehru Report with regard to the Muslim demands :- 1.-F ORM OF GOVERNMENT.The first question relates to the constitution of the Government, which, most Mussalmans think should be of the federal type.As already explained, this is the most important question without which, no safeguard what ever could prove of any avail.ilt is evident from the quotation of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad' s speech, that the Calcutta section of the

Page 35

[ 2s l League under the leadership of Mr.Jinnah is also for a federal type of Indian Government.But the Nehru Report instead of a federal type of Government, pro poses a unitarian type of Government of a centralised pattern, which will be considered as the real ruler of the country-the rights of the Provincial Government being derivative.There is no doubt that the -astute compilers of the Report could not frankly deal with this question for fear of provoking Muslim opposition, which it would be difficult to suppress.!\!either could they ignore this grave issue without being accused either of ignorance of politics, or of having not prepared the report with due care.Therefore, they very cleverly inserted the follow ing words in the beginning of the seventh chapter of the Report where they have formulated their recommenda tions :- 64 We have made no attempt to draft the consti tution as a whole.'' No sensible person, however, can plead that the compilers of a constitution could with in1punity ignore the question what was to be the future form of Govern ment of the country.The Nehru Committee has done so.But as such, an important question cannot be detached from the constitutional issue.So what has been con...cealed by omitting a de.finite ennunciation.the details have made it only too clear.Different passages of the Report show that the committee has proposed an all powerful central Government of a unitarian model..Article 34 under the heading, '' The Provincial Legisla ture '' in the chapter on u Recommendations " reads: ,' The legislative authority of every provincial council extends to all matters coming within the class of subjects hereinafter enumerated and specified in Schedule II, attached hereto.'' Similarly in the �ame chapter and under the heading..Parliament shall have power to make laws for the peace,

Page 36

[ 26 ] order and good Government of the Common,vealth in relation to all matters not coming in the classes of subjects by this Act assigned to the legislatures of provinces." From the above passages it is clear that in the future Government of India the provinces will derive their power from the Central Government, and not the latter from the former.Similarly in Article 30 under heading • • The Provincial Legislatures '• it is stated :-'' There shall be payable to the King out of the revenues of the province for the salary of the Governor an annual sum of......., which, until Parliament of the Common wealth otherwise provides shall be as in Schedule....hereof provided.'' It is apparent from this rule that the Provincial Legislature will be subordinate to the Central Parliament.A still more clear reference is to be found under the head '' Civil Service '' where under Article 81 is to be found :- 4 ' Parliament may also, to such extent and in respect of such matters as it may prescribe, dele gate the power of making rules under the said laws to the Governor-General in Council or to local govem- ments.' , It is amply clear from the above references that the constitution proposed by the Nehru Committee is one entirely opposed to the united Muslim demand.The Muslims demand a federal type of Government with fully autonomous Provincial Governments, only residuary powers vesting in the Central Government which should administer subjects, transferred to it by the provinces of their own accord, liable under no circumstances to inter vention on the part of the Central Body.It can hardly be gainsaid that without such a form of Government, security for Muslim in India is an impossible dream.The sole consideration underlying the Muslims' demand of

Page 37

[ 27 ] autonomy for Sindh, N.W.F.Provinces, and Baluchistan, is that, because of the existence of a Hindu minority in these Muslim provinces, the Hindu majority in other pro vinces will not be tempted to oppress the Muslim minorities in those provinces.But if all powers were to vest in the Central Government, this safeguard would be rendered absolutely useless.For, with the power to intervene at any time, the Central Government will inter £ ere in the affairs of the Muslim provinces whenever it chooses.If it is contended why it will do so,-well, that is the crux of the whole problem.Because there is lack of mutual trust between the two com munities.If there is no such distrust then all these restrictions are superfluous ; and it could be frankly stated that we should have full faith in our Hindu brethren.They could rule as they like.We could have expected nothing but good of them.With such a frame of mind the whole controversy would have ended at once, but where is that mutual trust? I 1.-SPECIAL REPRESENTATION.The second demand of the Muslim community relates to affording protection for minorities by giving a minority where it is weak, representation in excess of its legitimate share, and where it can hold its own, to give it not more than its legitimate right.The Nehru-Report has however decided that in no case should the minority enjoy any extra rights, neither where the minority is weak, nor where it is strong.The Report says :-..Representation in excess of their proportion in the population fixed for Moslems in a number of provinces-under the sanctioned pact as well as the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms, will disappear under our scheme.'' In other words this united demand of both the Lahore and Calcutta sections of the

Page 38

[ 28 ] League has also been rejected, which means that, because the Muslim in the Punjab and Bengal, on the ground of being a majority, have refused to be ruled by the Hindu minority, the concession of small extra representation enjoyed by the Moslems in other provinces, should be withheld from them, although such extra representation did not give the Moslems any dominating position in the councils, but merely made possible the representation in the councils of their various groups and associations.In the same connection the Muslims demanded that they should be granted 33 % of seats on the central legislature, so that their representation from differ ent provinces might be facilitated.The Calcutta and Lahore sections are uniformly at one in this demand.But this demand also has been rejected by the Nehru Committee.The Report says :-·• The Moslems are a little less than one-fourth of the total population of British India and they cannot be allowed reservation over and above that proportion in the central legislature.�' At present, though the number of Muslim seats -::n the legislative Assembly is not quite 33 % , yet it exceeds 25% in any case.The Nehru Committee recognises that 30% of the seats in the Legislative Assembly are at present occupied by Muslim representatives ; but it is not willing to give the Mussalmans even this proportion of seats in ,the future constitution.lln other words, while the inadequacy of 25 % of seats to represent the different Muslim interests, impelled the Muslim League to demand an increase in the present proportion of Muslim seats, or at least to maintain status quo, the Nehru Committee would, on the other hand, reduce the existing Muslim representation to one-fourth, i.e., 25 % ;-although such demand would in no way adversely affect the position of the Hindu majority.

Page 39

[ 29 ] Ill.-SEPARATE ELECTORATE.Over the third demand the Muslim opinion has differ ed.The Lahore League is not prepared to give up separate electorates so long as mutual confidence has not been restored between the two communities, and the Mussalmans themselves are not willing to dispense with the system.In the opinion of the Calcutta League however, there was no objection to the Muslims' dispens ing with separate electorates provided that Sindh was constituted into a separate province, and Reforms were extended to the N.W.F..Provinces, and Baluchistan.Of these two demands neither has been accepted by the Nehru--Report.The Nehru Committee admits as well that according to the League council decision, this was the irreducible minimum demand of the Moslem community.The resolution of the Calcutta League also points to the same intention.The resolution runs :-'' The Muslims will not abandon this right unless and until Sindh is con stituted into a separate and autonomous province, and Reforms are introduced in the N.W.F.Provinces, and Baluchistan.·, But the Nehru Committee accepts only one of the three demands, viz., extension of Reforms to the N.W.F.Provinces.The question of the separation of Sindh is hedged in with various conditions and limita..tions, and the question of Baluchistan again is dealt with in very ambiguous terms.The Report says:-'' As regards non-Moslem minorities the only provinces which deserve consideration are the N.W.F.Provinces and Baluchistan.'' The words indicate that the compilers of the Report had in mind that the question of the right� of the Hindus in Baluchistan will crop up.Yet, still further on page 124, while discussing communal representation under Article 7 it says :-" The N.W.F.Provinces, and

Page 40

I 30 J all newly fonned provinc<·s, by separation from oth r provinces, shall have the same form of governrnent a the other provinces in India.'' From the abov" quotation it will appear that whil dealing with the question of constitution alJ referenc to Baluchistan has been omitted.May be, this was du� to oversight.Nevertheless, the matter ib left doubtful.At any rate, we are justified to hold that the hru Committee has failed to fulfil those conditions upon which depended the Calcutta League's decision to abandon th system of separate electorate, and quite indep nd ntly of which, the Lahore League had decided to stick to th system for sometime to come.But the matt r do not end there.The wordings of the Calcutta L a u r olu tion clearly signify that the l�eague does not only d rn nd that the Hindus should agre•� to fulfil th condit1on before dispensing with separate I ctorat , but it n1 k two further provisos also, namely (I) that th condition should be practically acted upon, and (2) that �us\im should also satisfy thems lv s a r ards the r sult of the working thereof.It says • • Wh n th s condition have been fully compli cl with th i'ilus alrnans will b prepared to abandon the separat el ctorat syst m for the joint electorate.'· The Nehru Committe without accepting these con ditions, simply upon its own reco1nn1endation.dispen ed with the separate electorat syst rr1.On th contrary according to the reservation made by the Muslim League, it should have stated in unequivocal tenns that joint elec torate system would conle into operation only when the three preliminary conditions had been complied with.Similarly in the Muslim League Resolution, the words used are:-" then the Mussalmans will be prepared to abandon.'' According to the wording of the resolution

Page 41

l 31 1 the decision in this matter was left with the Muslims.Though it is by no means suggested here that the Mus lims might or might not abandon the system, yet the words do certainly signify that the Muslims would first satisfy themselves as regards th� fulfilment of their con ditions before deciding finally to do f.,way with the separ ate electorate system.But the Nehru-Report has alto gether ignored these terms.I remember it definitely that when it was again and again urged on the All-Party Muslim Conference that if the Hindus at first agreed to our terms, but later on plead ed that owing to certain obstacles, the terms, so agreed to, could not be put into practice, then how the Muslims would be able to force their hands ; Mr.Jinnah emphatically said that the wordings of the 1 esolutions had not been fully comprehended.Those wordings definitely meant that the joint electorate system would be intro duced only after those conditions had been practically ful filled.Separate representation would not be given up merely on the Hindus accepting the conditions.But hardly a year has elapsed that Mr.Jinnah has been dis illusioned.The Nehru-Report, without so much as accept ing them in toto, not to say of practically conforming to them, has rather rejected the separate electorate system.It does not even refer to these proposals.One section of the Muslim community notwithstand ing grave dangers ahead, with the sole desire to see peace established in India, was prepared to forego communal electorates and even to incur the displeasure of their own community, yet the fate which has been meted out to their proposals by the Nehru Committee has been already related.When such is the state of things at the very beginning, and at a time when in the enthusiasm for the attainment of Swaraj the Hindus are earnestly desirous of winning over the Muslims, what will be the

Page 42

[ 32 ] state of affairs, when India will grow free and Hindus will have all powers in their own hands, may better be imagined than described.IV.-N.W.F.PROVINCES, BALUCHISTAN AND SINDH.The fourth Muslim proposal related to the introduc tion of Reforms in the N.W.F.Provinces and Baluchistan, and the constitution of Sindh into a separate province with representative governmtnt.The Nehru Commii:tee has acceded to the extension of Reforms in the N.W.F.Provinces.Its intention is not clear with regard to Balu chistan.With regard to Sindh it stipulates that so long as the province cannot shoulder its financial responsibility or its inhabitants do not undertake to bear the charges, the province should not be made autonomous.Aparently these conditions are reasonable ; for when a province is financially incompetent how can it be constituted into an autonomous territory? They will leave the Muslims free to urge that when Sindh because of financial incompet ency cannot be made autonomous, separate representa tion also cannot be dispensed with, for which the separa..tion of Sindh was a precedent condition.I, however, propose to bring to light what is between the lines of this apparent simple recommendations of the Nehru-Re..port.The word ' responsibility ' is so comprehensive that by a mere specification of it, Sindh could be per petually kept out of autonomy.By 'responsibility', it may mean a simple system of administration, which I am sure Sindh is financially competent enough to adopt.Or, it may mean some such �xpensive system as may be impossible for a small province like Sindh to manage, and then the possibility of its growing into a separate province will be precluded for ever.I have grounds to suspect that by responsibility is here meant something

Page 43

[ 33 ] more than the need or the competence of the province.The Nehru-Report mentions that it received a combined memorial from the Hindu, Parsee and Muslim communi ties of Sind urging the necessity of constituting the pro vince into a separate entity.With regard to the finan cial question it had suggested that 4 ' the coat should be cut according to the cloth," i.e., they should be given an administration compatible with their financial strength, and the matter should not be postponed for long pending economic betterment.But the committee observes that it could not take the declaration as the final solution of the financial problem ( vide p.69 of the Nehru Report ).The inference is clear that what is intended is to recom mend an administrative machinery for Sindh which it is un equal to bear.And since the people of Sindh could not agree to shoulder such an administration because that would mean for them in its present status an economic loss instead of an economic advancement, the question of separation would naturally have to be dropped altogether.This view is further strengthened by the attitude of Pandit Nehru when, in regard to the motion for the separation of Sindh proposed to have been moved in the Bombay Legislative Council, he advised the Congress party to oppose such a motion in case the Muslim members in sisted upon moving the same.V.-THE LANGUAGE QUESTION.The fifth demand related to language.This demand has been altogether ignored by the Nehru Committee.It cannot, of course, contend that it is a minor matter.That certainly it is not.The future advance or fall of the Muslims lies linked with it.If the future Government of India were to discard Urdu, within a few years the few places which the Muslims still fill at present will be taken away from them, and their peculiar culture will be

Page 44

[ 34 ] lost.Even assuming that it was an uni,riportant matter, the importance attached to it by the party interested cannot be lost sight of.If the Muslims attach to the question of Urdu so serious an importance and consider it to be a question of life and death for the community it does not behove others to treat it lightly.Elsewhere II propose to show that the question of language is not a minor question and that it is not peculiar to India, also that in other countries a very great importance has been attached to this question and special laws have been en acted relating to it which have been incorporated in the constitution of the land.• Vl.-fREEDOM OF RELIGIOUS BELIEF AND PROPAGANDA.The sixth demand relates to non-interference in matters both religious and economic.The Nehru--Report is not clear on this point also.The importance and magnitude of this question have been obscured in a mass of words.The Report states under the heading '' Funda mental Rights '' :-'' Freedom of conscience and the free profession and practice of religion are, subject to public order or morality, hereby guaranteed to every person." These words hardly embrace the Mus1im demand.The Hindus always create disturbance over cow-slauethter.0 According to this rule their disturbance may prov!de justi- fication to prohibit cow-sacrifice.• Similarly nothing occurs in the Report about • Tab ligh, i.e., preaching of religion.This law gives every citizen a right to proclaim his religion but it does not give him the right to preach it to others with freedom.The law may at any time be interpreted to mean that, as ' Tabligh • leads to a disturbance of the ccuP.try' s

Page 45

[ 35 ] peace, it is therefore banned.You may proclaim your religion but cannot invite others to accept it.Similarly the law could be held to mean that as conversion leads to a disturbance of the peace, it is henceforth prohibited.The law of the liberty of conscience cannot prevent such an interpretation, because it is solely concerned with belief.Conversion means abandoning one community and joining the rank of another.Even if it were not so interpreted, at least a law may be enacted to the effect that no person can change his religion without a certi ficate from the Magistrate.It may be argued in favour of such action that in this way the chance of compulsion and the use of force will be prevented.Such a procedure is bound to stop religious conversions as is the case at present in several States.Firstly, because the people cannot undergo such a tedious procedure.If they apply for such permit then they are subjected to such questions as, who was the preacher, what was the manner of his preaching, whether force was anplied.and similar other questions, under the stress of which they are compelled to give up the idea of changing their religion.Instances are not wanting, and I am prepared to prove them.In short, the Article relating to religion has several loop holes which can serve to unduly restrict religious free dom.Thus the Nehru-Report fails to meet the Muslim demand from this view-point also.To my mind it actu ally runs counter to that demand.For in the chapter on " Fundamental Rights" in Article 12 it says:-" No person attending any school, receiving state aid or other public money shall be compelled to attend the religious instruction that may be given in the school.'' If the above article be read in the light of the fact that it is quite possible that under the future Government of India, a law may be enacted to the effect that no private school will be permitted which refuse to accept

Page 46

[ 36 ] Government aid and to conform to Government rules, the constitutional law does in no way forbid its enactment, -if such a legislation is passed, then it will mean that the Muslims will be gradually estranged from their reli..gion.Every religion and every religious institution is entitled to make religious education compulsory for its own followers, and this does by no means amount to compulsion.'It would be compulsion if one were to com pel people of other p�rsuations to follow instructions in one's religion.In fact, this law could in several respects be made an instrument for hampering Muslim reli gious education.To say that it will operate equally against the Hindus would amount to a betrayal of utter ignor ance of religions.Islam, unlike Hinduism, is a religion that has definite restrictions, a knowledge of which can be obtained only through proper education.Hinduism, on the other hand, is a political religion.A man alto gether unfamiliar even with the A.B.C.of the Vedas and its teachings, and following son-ie peculiar views of his own, may claim to be as good a Hindu as the most erudite master of the Vedas.VII.-AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION.The seventh demand is that questions growing out of mutual communal distrust, and solution whereof is essential in the interest of the minorities should be in corpora ted in the constitutional laws, so that their revi sion might not be easily effected.I am not aware whether any community other than our own has urged this demand.Nevertheless it is a most important de mand.But the Nehru Committee has chosen to ignore it.The demand was implied in the Lucknow Pact but was not embodied in legal language.The wordings were rather vague.

Page 47

[ 37 ] From the above it is clear that not one of the seven points of the Muslims has the Nehru Committee acceded to in full.Some of them it has wholly rejected, while a few have been accepted only partially.It is strange that in the latter instances the modifications have in every case defeated the very object of the demand, and both its acceptance and non-acceptance have thus grown equally ineffective.The question now arises that when the Nehru Committee has rejected even those terms which the moderate section of the Muslim community consi dered to be their minimum demands, can its findings be regarded to be just and fair? Can the Muslims hope to live in peace in India by accepting the same? I have given my most anxious thought to the question, and come to the conclusion that they cannot.1 1 propose to discuss it in the chapters that follow.In order to make it easily intelligible I have divided the subject under differ ent heads..- -

Page 48

CH APTER IV CAN DETAILS BE LEFT OVER TILL THE ATTAINMENT OF DOMINION STATUS? 1J3 EFORE saying a word in justification of Muslim de- mands, let me disabuse the Muslim P').ind of a danger ous idea, lest it should lead them to take such a step as it may not be possible for them to retrace and nothing but heart...burning may be the consequence thereof.It is urged to come to some decision novv to be modified later on, if any injurious aspect issues out of it.I understand that most of the 1\1ussalmans feel in the same strain, and as a result of this.there prevails among them a false, and, I would say, a danger ous sense of security.If the Muslims only realised that it· would be beyond their power to alter any decision they might make to...day about S\varaj, they would not be so hasty, and before taking a step fraught with so many dangers, they would try to answer a thousand ques..tions and discover various means of retreat.But it is most deplorable that some people have knowingly or un knowingly given the community an assurance that in case the present decision prove injurious in any respect, it will be possible to alter it in future.The Mussalmans are thus under this impression that the proposed changes will be nothing ;more than an experiment, that in case of defects coming to light, a new scheme will have to be devised.But I would tell them with all emphasis at my command that things stand quite th� other way.When a step has been taken to-day, there will be no going back to-morrow.It will be far easier for them to get all their demands acceded to now ; but after Swaraj has once been attained it will be simply impossible.

Page 49

[ 39 ] What is Dominion Status ? The Moslems should well understand that what the Nehru Committee and every Indian demand to-day is Dominion Status, i.e., a sort of semi-independent Govern..ment.1lt is worth their while to know what Dominion Status signifies, because without such a knowledge Muslims will not be able to realise that by their half hearted efforts to get their demands accepted, they are not only ruining their future generations but are also cut ting at the very root of Islam, and preparing the ground for the Spanish tragedy in India.Heaven protect us ! Dominion Self--Gover.:1.ment is a ver�r recent phrase, meaning that form of independent Government as obtains in Canada, Australia, South Africa, Newzealand and from the last five years in South Ireland.After various dis putes, and agreements up till the outbreak of the War the Dominions had acquired the following rights:- The British Parliament shall enact no legislation re lating to the internal administration of the Dominions, the Dominions reserving to themselves the right to legis late in matters internal.A Dominion may at any time deprive its own citizens of the right of appeal to the British Privy Council, i.e., it can declare the judgment of its own Supreme Court to be final.Every Dominion has the right to maintain its own military, naval forces for the protection of its own territories.It may also alter its constitution by a majority decision of its own parliament, even if such constitution was passed by the British Parliament.The British Government has the right to veto any law enacted by a Dominion Govern ment, but this privilege is not to be exercised except in matters which concern not exclusively that particular Dominion but affects other parts of the British Empire.

Page 50

[ 40 � It was decided in the Imperial Conference held in 1911 that British Policy in respect of Dominions will in future be, that they will enjoy complete independence in local administration without any limitation, and Great ·Britain will not inter£ere unless a Dominion has done something prejudicial to its loyal relations with.the Im perial Government ( vide Law of Constitution).But in this interval fresh developments have taken place and Dominions have been givea further priYileges.Though formally Great Britain still possesses the right to veto any law passed by a Dominion, this privilege has been practically surrendered.In f 920, the Queensland Gov ernment passed a certain law against which the local land holders as well as the British landholders registered their protests, declaring the law to be a transgression of the law of the constitution involving their forced ejection from lands by the Government.The British Govern ment, however, refused to interven.e, as it could not interfere in the internal affairs of the Dominions.In one thing alone Dominions entirely depend upon Great Britain and that is territorial expansion.Regarding foreign relations also, since the Creat War, the Dominions have achieved a good dea1 of free dom and subject to Great Britain's sanction.A Dominion can make treaties with other countries.In the Anglo Irish treaty of 1924, Great Britain recognised the right of the Dominions to remain neutral in any war that Britain might declare against any other people, their obligation to join being confined only to cases when another nat�on 'had initiated the offensive.In the former case the Domi nion Parliaments would have the right to decide whether to take an active part in the war or to keep aloof.With regard to treaties also it was mutually agreed that jf the Dominions were not consulted in respect of any treaty with a foreign nation and they were not signatories to the

Page 51

[ 41 ] same, such treaties would not be binding upon the Dominions.In 1924, the late Mr.Bonar Law, a former prime minister, addressing the Imperial conference, re cognised the right of the Dominions to sever the imperial connection any moment they chose.The Government of South Africa and Canada too have declared their right to break off from Great Britain (Encyclopredia Britanica, XIII Edition-Supplementary List Vol I under British Empire).The above-mentioned sketch of the constitution of Dominion Governments indicates that the Dominion form of Government is a sort of independent Government with the only difference that for the time being they recognise the sovereignty of the British Crown, and by acknowledg ing to be component parts of the British Empire, add to its prestige and derive benefit from such a connection.Nevertheless, the decision is a ).natter of its own sweet will whether a Dominion would maintain or break the Imperial connection.Secondly, the other limitation to its complete independence is, that, although in internal matters, it enjoys perfect independence having the power not only to make ordinary laws but nlso to alter its con stitution, a Dominion, so long as it maintains the imperial connection, is bound to transact all important foreign alfairs through the intermediary of the British Government.This is the kind of independent Government demand ed by the Nehru Committee, and the whole of the !Indian people barring a negligible few, joins in the demand.The question now arises how is it possible to effect an alteration in the laws of &uch a Government? For, the problem before us is that if the dec1sjons of the Nehru Committee do not prove favourable to us, will it be possible for us to get it modified? And if so, how?

Page 52

[ 42 ] It· should be borne in mind that under such a kind of Government, there arc only three ways to change a law : (I) By the votes of a majority in the Councils.(2) By forcing the hands of Government by opposi tion.(3) By overthrowing it with the help of forei gn powers.I see that those who have endorsed the views of the Nehru Committee have placed their reliance upon one or other of these three alternative means for the removal of their future grievances.Some are of opinion that if the rights which they are going to waive to-day, should in future be found indispensable for the community's w I f are, they would be able to regain the same through the legislature by getting the laws changed.Another grouo while admitting its inability to carry the houses with th m, believes that, jf a necessity arises for a change in the law they would be able to set up an effective opposition to Government and force it to chang the law according to the wish of the community.'There is yet a third group which admits that the Indian Moslems can do nothing of themselves, but with the help of the neighbouring Muslir-o kingdoms they would be able to upset any Government that would deprive them of their rights.I shall take up the three alternatives severally and show that under the conditions of a Dominion form of Government it will be impossible for the Mos Iems to regain their lost rights by any of these three courses.THE MussALMANS AND TflE CouNCIL�.With regard to the first suggestior that the Mus- 1ims will be able to secure their rights through the Coun..cils, it must be borne in mind, that according to the Nehru-Report, the powers to decide the Muslims' rights

Page 53

[ 43 ] are vested in the Central Government, where their repre sentation, as apportioned by the Nehru Committee, will be less than what it is now.When our present experi ence shows that in spite of our thirty per cent.representa tion in the Assembly, we fail to have our way even by joining hands with Government members, what may --Ne expect to achieve in future, when we shall be reduced to 25% only, and when the British element will be com pletely absent ; particularly when the question will be not one of general policy but of strengthening the present weak position of the Muslim community by effecting changes in the constitution.Can any sensible person even for a moment conceive that a single Hindu vote will go in favour of the Muslims over such a pro posal? Again, can any sensible man conceive that 25% Muslims will be able to force the hands of 25 �6 non Muslims and get the law passed in their favour? Specially when it is a question appertaining to a change not of the ordinary law but of the constitutional law, which it is still more difficult to bring about.The Nehru Com mittee in their report lays down the fallowing procedure in respect of future alterations in the constitutional law : -" Parliament may, by law, repeal or alter any of the provisions of the constitution, provided that the bill em bodying such repeal or alteration shall be passed by both Houses of Parliament sitting together and at the third reading shall be agreed to by not less than two-thirds of the total number of both Houses.A bill so passed at such a joint sitting shall be taken to have been duly passed by both Houses of Parliaments." In accordance with the above rule if the Muslims should in future find that they committed a blunder in accepting the Nehru Committee•s recommendations and were rather hasty in relinquishing their demands, then in

Page 54

[ 44 ] order to get their present demands restored, they would have not only to attend the meeting of the Legislature in their full strength but also to win the support of at 1east 42% that is 234 of the Hindu members to vote in favour of their demand..Not even a crack brain will venture to hope that so many Hindu members will be prepared to support the demand of the Muslims for the restora tion of certain right� which the Hindus themselves have usurped.In fact, I have under-estimated the difficulty.For, it is absolutely wrong to assume that all the mem bers of the Legislative Body will be present on any occa sion.That is never so even in European Parliaments.Of the 700 members, some will be ill, some will have sick relatives, and others will be detained owing to urgent business.Thus a margin of 20°£ should be left for ab sentees.Under the circumstances the Muslims shall have to secure the support of 60% of the Hindu members at tending.1I ask again is there any Mu�hm, however blind in his support of the Nehru Report, who will be bold to say that if after a lapse of ten years it appears that the joint electorate system has proved detrimental to Moslem interests, which in other words would mean that the Hindus had captured more seats than their numbers would justify, or that such Mussalmans had been re· turned as instead of serving Muslim interests, serve the ends of the Hindus, then will 60% of the Hindu members of the Parliament vote with the Muslim members in order that the Hindu community should be deprived of this advantage and Muslims be restored the right of separate representation, or that complete internal autonomy should be conferred upon the provincial Government? ,lf not, and every sensible man will th1nk such an eventuality to be impossible, then I say, when it will be impossible to regain your rights in future, then why should you not press for the same now?

Page 55

[ 45 ] THE UsE OF FoRcE.The second alternative is that the Muslims should get their wrongs redressed by force.With regard to this I would simply ask whether the Muslims feel that strength in themselves.Tow day the Britishers are ruling in India and their number hardly exceeds a few lakhs.Both the Hindus and Muslims are agreed that power should be wrested from the English, but nevertheless, has our united strength so far proved effective in changing the Govern ment? If it has not, then what show of power will the Mussalmans be able to make when India will be governed by Indians and the advantages of keeping intact the existing fabric of its Government will accrue not to a few lakhs but to a population numbering as many as 26 crores? Further it should also be borne in mind that the army will be under the control of the Central Government.To imagine that Muslim soldiers will desert the Govern ment that pays them and support their community is un thinkable.Even at present one can easily see that they stand for the British Government and not for the Indians.In fact, it is the sentiment of loyalty that upholds the soldier's spirit, and he is never easily persuaded to revolt against his Government.Besides, the modern organisa tion of the army is such that it is impossible for any one unit to break out into revolt, because no one unit is com plete in itself.The army, as a matter of fact, is com posed of six or seven parts, all of which during an operaw tion are mutually inter-dependent and each, fully aware of the fact that in the event of desertion it will meet sure annihilation.Apart from this, aeroplanes, tanks and guns of modern types, have altogether changed the form of wars, a single aeroplane being capable of devastating a

Page 56

46 l ,,, holt ount.ry, and a siugl tank al lt, to challt.ng a whole 1rn1y.In , horl', wnr to clny dc.p nds not so much on 1nan' s p rsonal slr ngth and hrav ry as on tht.mechan.is1n� of war.And vc ry nnl11rnlly chivalry and courage ,vithout th 111 hnnis1ns of war cannot now give th<.san, ad 1 antng ns th y did in the past.'"['hus r<·volts in these day!.'., nrc not th, affairs of a particular s ction of peopl but of the country as a whole.Men carry on th ir activiti s in s er 't, inciting the whole country; and the arn1y.the office--bcarers.and the civil population, all rise sin1ultaneously against the Government.Only a few high officials are left to deal with the revolt.But the l\tlussaln1ans can never expect to bring about such a state of things in India for the obvious reason that the major part of the population is Hindu, and naturally their sym pathy will go with the Government.Moreover, the l\1ussalmans should bear in mind that the Hindus are not all what they call the Baniyas.The Pt1njab Mussalmans have been labouring under the false impression that these Baniyas can never put up a fight against them.While as a matter of fact the Sikhs also socially form a part of the Hindus, though from religious standpoint they are nearer to the Moslems than to the Hindus.B(-sides, on account ot certain other political considerations, the Sikhs, unless and until some leader of exceptional ability should rise among them, are compelled in political matters to join hands with the Hindus.Their population is confined to the Punjab, where they have relatively the same status as the Muslims have in the whole of India.But under the special conditions of the Punjab where the Muslims form only a very narrow majority, the Sikhs cannot be granted any special concessions.And it happens that the Moslems have become an obstacle in the path of the Sikhs.Hence it is that they are obliged to come to an understanding with the Hindus, and notwithstanding a11

Page 57

[ 47 ] overtures from the part of the Moslerns and their support, and Hindu opposition in the matter relating to Gurdwaras, the Sikhs are keeping hand-in-glove with the latter.Besides the Sikhs, among the Hindus themselves, there are martial classes, such as the Jats, the Rajputs, the Dogras, the Poorbees, the Mahrattas and many other tribes of Southern India.Even the Gurkhas who follow Buddhism, consider themselves a part of the Hindu religi our community.In face of these facts, i: is simply suicid- al to deceive ourselves by entertaining the idea that the Hindu population preponderates, it is only natural that pride in the fact that Muslim element is prepondering in the army.This is nothing but a diplomatic move on the part of the British Government.In a country where the Hindu population preponderates, it i3 only natural that the Government should in order to strengthen themselves follow the policy of enlisting a comparatively large num ber of the smaller communities in their army.But in a free India there will be no such necessity.On the con trary the majority community in order to strengthen their position will think of enlisting in the army a larger number of their own co-religionists.The Sikhs, the Oogras, the Rajputs the Mahrattas, the Gurkhas, the Poorbees and the Southerners number from 50 to 60 millions.These could easily furnish men for the army.The idea that we could secure our rights by force is a devilish misconcep tion of which the sooner we disabuse our minds the • better.One section of the Mussalmans is of opinion that the Moslems will win their object by non-co-operation.But it must be remembered that non-co-operation is a weapon, which only a big community can with advantage use against a smaller community, but not a small community against a larger body.A small community of men speci-

Page 58

[ 48 ] ally of such, whose activities contribute little towards the civic or political life of the country, can hardly make any impression when pitched against a large population.In Bardoli, the strength of the non-co-operators' position consisted in their having the country behind them.The Britishers could not come over to purchase their lands in India.But if it ever comes to a conflict between the Hindus and the Muslims, the former will not suffer any of the disadvantages which Englishmen had to experi ence.They will be able to put in three Hindus for every Mussalman.Thus the idea of fighting the Hindus through non-co-operation is also not worth consideration.THE HELP OF FOREIGN Po,vERS.The third alternative is that the Moslems should seek the co...operation of foreign powers in order to regain their lost rights.That too is hardly feasible.Firstly, no foreign country could be expected for their sake to enter into hostilities with a neighbouring power.Is there in the near past any example of any Muslim power coming to the help of another? How then should we persuade ourselves to believe that the adjoining powers will hasten to our aid? Again it is a sheer madness to expect that an outside power will sacrifice lakhs of men and crores of rupees, and in the event of a victory will withdraw in favour of the Indian Mussalmans.The invading power will either demand the whole of the conquered territory or a portion thereof ; and I am sure that a section of the Indian Muslims themselves would oppose such a demand and refuse to admit the foreigners into their country.Thirdly, even assuming that some foreign power would feel disposed to make such an adventure, what power is there prepared to launch an attack against a vast country like India, thoroughly equipped with all the mode1·n impli-

Page 59

[ 49 ] men ts of war? Afghanistan has a population of barely one crore, Persia of one crore and a half, while Indian population exceeds 33 crores.Fourthly, the fact must be remembered that India will be given dominion status and not complete independence.As such, it will form a part of the British Empire and in the event of a foreign power launching an offensive against India, the whole Empire will be at its back.Thus judging by the material aspect of the question, even the third alternative is an impossible dream.Moreover, it is highly immoral to wish for such a foreign intervention, an act of high treason to the nation.BRITISH INTERVENTION NOT POSSIBLE.Possibly there are some who think that as India will not be completely independent we will appeal to England for a restoration of our rights.From what I have stated elsewhere regarding the rights of the Domi nions, it will appear that no such thing would be possible.Firstly, because here the question would be not the Hindus encroaching upon our rights, but the question would be how to persuade the Hindus to restore us our rights which we, of our own free will, would have given away only to discover our mistake later on.Now, from the legal point of view it is evident that although Britain will have the formal right to veto the decision made by the Dominions, it will not have even the formal right to force anything new upon the dominions.Legally, there fore, Great Britain shall have no right to interfere in s uch matters, and even if it had, it does not stand to sense that Britain would care to exercise the right.I have a very high opinion of Great Britain, but nevertheless, I cannot

Page 60

I 50 l persuade myself to think for a moment that Britain will incur national loss for the sake of another party.Every sensible man can well understand that the ties that bind Britain and the Dominions together are those of senti ments, and no worldly force unites them.A Dominion has its own army, its own navy, its own administration, there being only a solitary Governor coming from Great Britain who also is a mere figure-head.And further, when the Dominions have the right to break away from Britain at any time they choose, how is it possible that Great Britain will offend, for the sake of a minority, a powerful Dominion -..vhich is the star of its diadem.Britain· s justice is limited by her national interests.When her national interests are at stake, Great Britain will not decide its policy on the merits of the case, but from the imperial viewpoint.It must not be forgotten that no one will befriend a minority unless there is some thing material to �be gained.A minority must trust to itself to safeguard its interests.In support of my con tention that the minorities are faced with utmost difficulty in obtaining justice for th <:; mselves, I would quote the views of one, who is at present the greatest authority on the subject.I mean Prof.Gilbert Murray, who accom panied the British Delegation to the Peace Conference-as an expert, and subsequently worked under the League of Nations.He is interested specially in the welfare of 1 the minorities, and has, in this connection, made several useful suggestions to the League '' In his introduction to '· The Protection of Minorities '' by Miss L.P.Mair, M.A., Prof.Gilhe1t Murrav writes,- 11 The duty laid upon the Council has proved somewhat alarming to the timid virtue of that eminent body.To intervene on behalf of oppressed minorities is to �ourt unpopularity and cer..tainly no member of the Council has shown alacrity either to listen to complaints or to remedy injustice.''

Page 61

[ 51 j From the above it is clear that even the appeals of minorities fail to be effective because espousing the cause of minorities means war with majorities, and no body likes to get into trouble for the sake of others.The Muslims should, therefore, consider this door as also closed upon them.Do not the Muslims pe1ceive that, from the days the Reforms have been introduced.an increasing number of Britishers is daily becoming the partisans of the Hindus? Of the British-owned papers, with a few excep� tions, all are in favour of the Hindus.The speeches of British statesmen one and all su.pport the Hindu view� point.And if you mark the British officials, you will find them patting the Hindus on the back.What is the reason behind all these? Do the Muslims think that this is because the Hindus are in the right, and they in the wrong? If such is their conviction then all they should do is to give up this position and adopt the right attitude.But if it is not so, then they should attribute this sudden change to the introduction of the Reforms As the foundation of the representative form of Governrnent has been laid in India, the Britishers are day by day leaning towards the Hindus.But this is only the beginning.When India will attain to full responsible Government, and the Hindus will dominate in the Assembly, then it will be the most cherished object of the Britishers to win the Hindus· goodwill and favour.When we see that in Ireland the English ignored the opposition of men of their owt'.race and religion, and acceded to the wishes of people of South Ireland, how can we then expect them to support the Indian Muslims against their own best national interests ? Let the Muslims then wake up and safeguard their own interests, for what they surrender to-day, they are sure by no means to get back to-,norrow.Only two alternatives will be open to them either to give up their religion and merge in the Hindus, er to allow themselves to be gradu..

Page 62

[ 52 ] a lly o bliterate d.Does either of the two alternatives app e a l to the Muslims? If not, then I discharge rnY.duty by wa r ning them to- d ay that now is their.opportunity _ to s e cure thei r rig hts.A mistake now made 1s sure to bnng ir r eparable disaster.They must not be hasty,.an� must n ot r j s k thei r p resent freedom in the hope o f winning fuH i n d e p end e nce.The y must not help to re peat the scenes e n ac t ed in S p ain ; for , one Spain is enoug h to make us m i s e r a bl e.I do n o t m e an to sa y tha t you mus t not make efforts for t h e fre e do m of India.Now when Grea , Britain he r s e lf h as d e cided tha t India i s entitled to re presentative G o v e rn m en t , I full y a.ssociate m yself with m y countr y m e n i n every leg itimate effor t made fo r its attainment.B u t wh a t weig h s heavy u pon m y mind and saddens m y h e ar t is the thou g h t , tha t the Muslim s should agree t o cons tit u ti o n a l reform s withou t safeguarding thei r own i n t eres t s.The conse quence s of such action are bound t o b e m os t bitter and disasterous.Th e Muslim ought no t t o a gr e e t o an y settlemen t unt il th e proposals o f b o t h th e se ction s of the Lea gu e hav e been acc-�pted, o th e r w is e i t w ill result i n s o serious a situation that th e v e r y th o u gh t of it makes one shudde r.This also shoul d b e b orne in mind that i f the a.hove-mentioned proposals o f th e o p p o n e nt s of the Nehru-Report , -whethe r Leaguer s , Khilaf a tis ts or other s, are made a basis of any agreement , th e n th e Mu � salman s will have littl e t o fea r regardin g f u tu re alte r atio n of the present decisions.In th a t cas e the i r ri g ht s will be ade quat e l y protected.Thereafte r i f th e s a fe g u a rd s are found su p erfluou s , i t will n o t b e diffi c u l t t o amend the Ia\iv s , because i t will be the Hindus , an d no t the Muslim s, who w i ll benefit b y suc h ainen d m e n t, a n d th e Hindus w i ll no t therefor e oppos e suc h c h an g e.

Page 63

CHAPTER V.Do Minorities Need Special Laws 'l \1 HIS question has long engaged public attention.We have instances of such protective laws under the Roman Empire for the benefit of the Jews-provisionally for a few years ; and under Islamic rule from the very outset for the benefit of the non-Muslims.After the conquest of Constantinople, Muhammad II enacted special laws for the protection of Christian subjects, most of which remained in vogue until February, 1926, when the Turkish Government replaced Islamic Laws by the Swiss Civil Code, in their country.But the question of minorities was recognised as an international problem for the first time in 1814 when the Congress of Vienna established the new Government of the United Nether lands.As there existed in this country two different languages and two different religions, a document was drafted in the interest of minorities known in history as the " Eight Articles." Article, 2, was to the effect that " there shall be no change in the articles of the Fundamental Law which assure to all religious cults equal protection and privileges, and guarantee the admissibility of all citizens, whatever be their religious creed, to public offices and dignities.·• ( The Protection of Minorities, p.36 ).Article 4-" All the inhab,tants of the Netherlands thus having equal claim to all commercial and other rights of which their circumstances allow without any hindrance or obstruction being imposed on any to the profits of others." ( Ibid.p.30 ).In as much as up to

Page 64

l 5 4 J that tim e t h e diversity of re lig i on s was c o nside r e d to be t h e so l e caus e of conflicts , t h e re f er e nce i n th e t r ea ty i s confined t o re ligio n on l y.L a t er on, i t appea red t h a t majoritie s i n order t o crus h min o r it i e s c ou l d inve n t o t h e r mea n s also.F o r instanc e, in th e N e th er l a nds t h e d es truction o f the minor i t y wa s attem p t e d by th e s u ppre s..sion o f i t s ton gu e.Accordingl y , i n I 8 3 0 a t the ti m e of the establishment of the kin gd o m o f Greec e ; in 185 3 at the tim e o f the s eparatio n of th e I on i an i s l a n d s ; i n 1 8 56 at the time o f s eparatio n of Rll ma n i a ; a n d i n 1878 a t th e Congress o f Berli n, re gard in g S er v i a, M o n t e ne gr o , an d Bulgaria, the need fo r the p r o t e c ti o n of mi nor i t i es w a s reco gnise d and law s were for rn al a t e d t o s a fe g uar d t h e i r interest s.After the Great War wh e n f r e s h c h a n g es to ok p l ace in Europe, specia l undertakin g s w e r e ob ta in ed f r o m Poland, Lithuania , Lativia , E s t h o nia , A u s t ria , Hun g a ry , Rumania, Czechoslovakia , an d Jug os l ov aki a.Ever y e f for t was made in thes e treatie s t o s a f e g uar d t h e r i g h ts of the minorities from cncroach � n e n t b y th e ma j or i t i e s.From the facts narrate d � b ov e.it i s c l e a r th a t t h e question of p rotection of mino r iti e s h as f o rcen t u r i es p as t engaged publi c attention, and n a ti o n s a ll over the wo rld have acknowledged it s im port a nce.A t pr es en t i t i s uni versall y admitted tha t minorities , p a r ti cul a rl y i m p ort ant minorities, req uire s pecia l safeg u ar d s.Th e onl y diff e r ence o f views on the subject , t h at n o w pr e vail s , i s t h a t some nations contend that in th e i r co u n t ry t he r e is no conflict between the ma joriti e s an d t h e mi n o r iti es a n d ' that therefore no discrim i nator y law s s h o uld b e i n t r od u ced there, while others urg e that wh e n s u c h l a ws h a ve been introduced in their countries , the y m ust be a d o p t e d b y all nations.In this connectio n , the follo wing obse r v a • tions of Miss L.P.Mair may he re ad w i t h i n t e r est :-

Page 65

"[ 55 ] • • But President Wilson did not answer the claim that the same obligations should be imposed on all States which possess minorities.That still remains unanswered and the inequality that which results from the Treaties is resented far more strongly than the interference with domestic affairs which their p1ovisions involve." ( Ibid.p.35 ).Among those countries to which new minorities have been added after the war, one is Italy.No under taking has been taken from this country regarding minorities.But the plight of minorities there is enough to indicate the importance of the need for their protec tion.( The case may well serve as an object lesson to the Mussalmans to see what is likely to be their end in case they agree to a settlement with their Hindu com patriots without adequately safeguarding their own interests.} In the newly ceded Italian territory there are parts inhabited by Germans, :'lnd parts inhabited by Serbs and Groats.How Italy, a country far more advanced than India, has treated those people '\vill be clear from an inter..view given by Signor Mussolini to a French journalist in February, 1926.Miss Mair ,vrites this as under: ,• When I visited the South Tyrol, ( Austrian territory which Italy has obtained now wherein German population predominates), I noticed that everything there was Ger man :-Church, Schools, public functionaries, railway and post officials.Every where HothiI'g but the German language was heard and people sang songs such as in Rome would have caused their immediate arrest.Now in all the schools of this Province the teaching of the Italian language is obligatory, all post and railway officials are Italians, and we are just now about to settle there a large number of Italian families.One thousand families of ex combatants will be sent to South Tyrol with a view to

Page 66

r s6 r promoting the amelioration of the soil.In this '\A1ay we shall succeed in ltalianising ti:e country." (Ibid.p.209).The detail of this Italianisation is as follows :- , ' All laws and regulations are published in Italian only.The decree of October fs, 1925, making Italian compulsory in the Courts effectively deprives the minori ties of all rights at law.This decree forbids the use of any language other than Italian in all civil and criminal procedure, written and oral.Per sons who cannot under stand Italian cannot be empanelled.All documents, evi dence, etc., in other languages than Italian are null and void." ( Ibid.pp.212, 213 & 214 ).After enumerating these fact� the able authoress of '' The Protection of Minorities '' observes :- '' Only the existence of the Treaties * * * has pro tected other minorities from a similar fate.This illustra tion of what rampant nationalism can do shows how essential the treaties were and how mistaken it was to make an exception in deference to the '' Soverei gn ty of Italy." I have nothing to add to the above quotations.The necessity for protecting minorities has been universally recognised.Their plight in Italy where the question of their protection was not taken into consideration is a grim warning to other countries.It now lies with the Mussal� mans to benefit by these lessons.NEHRU COMMITTEE RECO\iIMENDS NO PROTECTIVE LAW FOR MUSLIMS.When I have explained at length the needless to refute the suggestions 1nade Committee.But as details may help to.position, it 1s by the Nehru make it still

Page 67

[ 57 j clearer I think it desirable to point out that the Nehru c:ommittcc has supported the C:ongrcss and the Maha sabha view that when equitable lavvs will be formulated, the n1inorities will not stand in the fear of harm at the hands of 1najorities, and there �hall be no need to afford the1n special protection.The argument has all along been advanced by the Hindu community, and even in the Nehru-Report the same may be read between the lines.In fact, the Report has advanced a queer new argument.It says :- " If communal protection was necessary for any group in India it ·vVas not for two major communities, the Hindus and the Mosle--ns.It might have been neces sary for the small communities which together form 109{, of the total." ( Nehru-Report, p.28 ).Thus according to the Nehru Committee, minorities as a rule require no protective laws.If such laws are necessary, they are necessary for very small communities, and not for the Mussalmans.I am unable to follow the logic of this argument.The finding appears to me to be wholly contrary to reason.It may be held to be correct only if we assume the correctness of the following pro positions which is far from being the case:- (i) Between the large minority and the majority there are chances of friction less than those between the small minorities and the majority.(ii) Uniform laws always lead to due administration of justice.On my part I am not prepared to accept the correct..ness of either of the two propositions, and I do not think any wise man will accept them to be correct.The first of the two propositions is incorrect, because the fact, that brings a majority and a minority into conflict, is not the difference of their numbers, but the presence of some

Page 68

[ 58 J such causes as create in the two parties mutua'l rivalry and animosity, and when such causes are present it is immaterial whether the minority is big o.r small, the majority tries to bring it to grief.CAUSES OF FRICTION BETWEEN MAJORITIES AND MINORITIES.Of the different causes that make for a clash between minorities and majorities, the following are the most potent:- ( 1) In case the minority had held its sway over the majority in the near past and oppressed it, or created an impression in the mind of the majority that it had been so oppressed; in both these cases the majority is obses sed with the idea of avenging itself.(2) If the minority has a culture and social order which is superior to and predominant over that of the majority, then the majority feels impelled to destroy the minority because of its constant fear that, given the opportunity to progress the, minority will obliterate its own culture and social order.(3) When there is something peculiar in the minority which prevents it from being absorbed in the majority, the latter feels ill at ease over the prospect of the country being always divided into two parties with no hope of the minority merging in the majority, nor even of its being so reconciled to the majority that its distinctive features might disappear and there• might be at least an outward appearance of unity.( 4) When a minority has such potentialities as to make the majority apprehensive that, if not curbed the minority will one day become the majority.

Page 69

[ 59 ] (5) When the minority does not consider itself to belong to the country and has its eyes fixed upon its brethren beyond the country, then the majority feels apprehensive lest the minority should some day deal with it treacherously, and therefore it tries to suppress it.(6) When the majority is benefitted materially by the economic backwardness of the minority, it is afraid lest it should lose by an awakening among the minority.These are the six important causes, the existence of some or all of which makes the majorities resort to a policy of aggression against the minorities, and the minorities distrustful of the majorities.A consideration of these factors will lead every sensible man to the con clusion that there is no reason why bigger minorities should be less in danger than smaller ones.On the con trary, it is apparent that whether the minority be big or small, it will be equally in danger whenever there are present the above-mentioned conditions.In fact, a very small minority which forms only one or two per cent.of the entire population, or less, has practically nothing to fear, because the majority is fully confident that its posi tion is in no danger.It is therefore that the Christians, the Buddhists, and the Parsees, who together form only one-tenth of the whole population, are in no danger at all.If there is any class that is in a real danger, it is the Mussalmans, regarding whom the Hindus might feel apprehensive that they might one day increase and over whelm them.PROTECTION OF MINORITIES IN EUROPE.In other countries too we find no discriminative pro cedures adopted between big and small minorities.In Europe, for instance, in dealing with the protection of

Page 70

[ 60 ] minorities no differentiation was made between big and small minorities.In Poland, for example, where the minorities exceed 28 % of the population, their rights have been protected.ln Czechoslovakia, the Germans alone number about 25 % of the total inhabitants.In theit case too, safeguards have been provided.T d say that only small minorities require to be protected is therefore not only unwise but also contrary to a practice universally observed.I am, therefore, surprised to see the Nehru Committee boldly putting forward a theory.opposed alike to sense and precedent.In this connection, I cannot help remarking that to the powerful anything might suffice for an argument.For it is strange that here we find in India the major com munity viz., the Hindus, trying in the ehru-Report to persuade us to the doctrine that only small minorities and not large ones stand in need of prot,�ctive laws.The Report says:-'' It ( protection) might have been neces sary for the small communities which together form )0 ° ' of the total." ( P.28 ).On the other hand, we find the Government of Estho nia, a small State formed out of the old Russian Empire, where the minorities form only 10 ° ,� of the population, in reply to the demand of the League of Nations that some legislative measure should be introduced to ensure the protection of minorities' rights, observes that • • the minority in their country is numerically so small that no need is felt for the protection of its rights." ( Vide, The Protection of Minorities, p.114).It is paradoxical indeed that while the Indian majority should be unwilling to accede to the Muslirn demand for protective laws on the ground that they are not so small in number as to require any protection, and that such a demand can be entertain --

Page 71

[ 61 ] ed only on behalf of a minority numbering, say lOo/r J of the total, the majority in Esthunia should plead that the minorities in their country are too few to need any pro tection, being 10% only.One fact, however, is apparent in both cases.The motive is the same.That irrespec tive of the minorities being small or large, the majority is unwilling to concede to them their rights, and is bent upon their destruction on some pretext or others.MERE UNIFORMITY OF LAWS IS NO SUFFICIE�T SAFEGUARD FOR MINORITIES.Having proved the falsity of the doctrine that the need for protection depends upon the size of the minority, I now turn to the other proposition, namely, that the mere enactment of uniform laws ensures the due administra tion of justice.I have used the word � uniform • to signify both justice and equality.The two possible significances of the proposition are that- ( 1) when the same laws apply to all, justice becomes established, and there is no occasion for anyone to grumble, and (2) when both parties are treated on a basis of equality, and the laws are such as give due consideration to the need of both parties, then also there is nothing to complain about.To my mind the doctrine is fallacious in both of its interpretations.For, it is wrong that the formula tion of one and the same law for all communities gives no occasion for grievances because it leads to the establishment of justice.Nor is it right to assert that when laws are framed in fairness with a view to secure the respective rights of different communities according to their needs, their rights are safeguarded, and there

Page 72

l 62 J remains no further grievance.The first argument, that ,vhen one and the same law applies to a whole country, nobody should have occasion to complain because justi...e demands that all should be treated equitably, is errone ous, because in the first place men happen to differ from one another in their conditions.As such.the effect of the laws is not the same in all cases.Some they affect more than others.When, therefore.a particular law affects a certain community most, and does not either affect another at all or affects it nominally.such a la\v cannot be said to be equitable.For instance, if a law prohibiting cow-slaughter ·were enacted for the '\.vhole of India as is even now being done by certain municipalities, will it be held equitable merely for its being applicable to the Hindus and the Muslims alike? � 'ot at all.Such a law will be judged not by the fact that it applies equally to all communi6es, but it will have to be seen v.T hich community does it affect adversely.As a people the Hindus are opposed to cow-slaughter.it is evident that even if the law applies equally to both the Hindus and the Muslims, the latter alone stand to suffer.To take another example: if the Government of the Punjab were to pass a law declaring that all lands should be Government pro� perty, or if such a law were passed in Sindh, then the consequent loss to the Hindus will be only slight con1 pared to the loss suffered by the 1\luslim comn1unity.Similarly, if heavy taxes were imposed upon trade with the ultimate intention of destroying it, no one will say that the tax will affect the Muslim community equally with the Hindus.Every intelligent man will understand that the tax is intended to hit the Hindus.It is thus a mistake to think that the enactment of uniform laws will dispose of all complaints.If victuals, suitable for adults alone were provided in a house where there are both children and adults, it will certainly not be justice.Similarly, if a

Page 73

[ 63 1 child were forced to�move in a crowd of men in a fair.it \.Yould never be right.In order to ensure fairness and justice, conditions must be made suitable to the strength of the child.To give him justice he should be carried on the shoulder, and given diet suitable to his age.Having nov.1 proved that uniform laws do not necessarily lead to justice, and that very often they actually defeat the ends of justice, I would now proceea to sho,v that such a contingency is not merely imaginary, but that in the world we have actual instances of men trying to injure particular communities by the enactment of ostensibly equal laws.For instance, the enactment of the East African immigration Laws created quite a stir in India, when it was urged that though the la\.v was ostensibly meant to apply uniformly to all.it '\Vas actually intended to harm the Indians.Similarly.when the ne,v Government of Czechoslovakia legislated that landed pro perty of any individual owner exceeding 500 acres should be confiscated and should change hands.it appeared on the surface to be an equitable law, but it really aimed ¼t the ejection of the pre-war big German property owners.The Czecks themselves were mostly factory owners, and threfore there was little danger of any loss to them arising from the new law.The Germans raised a loud protest but their protest fell on deaf ears.The Government con-.tended that the law was just inasmuch as it affected th� Germans and the non-Germans alike.( V ide the Protection of Minorities, p.120).Similar action V.1 as taken by the Rumanian Government in Transylvania where the Magayrs were in possession of the land.( Vide, Ibid p.' /44).Thus, it is clear from historical examples also that ostensibly un1f orm laws have often a definite purpose behind them,-that of harming a particular community or

Page 74

[ 64 1 preventing it frorn enjoying it.s lcgitirnate rjghts.'The authoress of " 1'hc /J r oleclion of Minorities " al�o shares the snrne view.She writes :- "'fhc i1l-treat1nenls of rninorities may range from the crude forms of massacre and mass expulsion to more re fined methods, of which the most popular js the restric tion of the free use of the mother tongue.r:ducation, laws and regulations for the administration of justice are the most obvious means to this end." ( Ibid.p.29 ).From the above it is abundantly clear that in our times majorities oppress the minoritie5 through the refined process of enacting laws, which are ostensibly uniform, but which result in the annihilation of a particular community.It is thus clear that in framing a constitution for India it is not sufficient to see that the laws are the same for the Hindus and the Muslims, but what is im portant is to know how the laws will affect each of the two communities.If it is proved that laws ostensibly uniform are actually disastrous to the Moslems by either directly injuring their interests, or preventing then1 from enjoying their legitimate rights, then it wiil be necessary by all means to alter the san1e.The other aspect of this question is that jf laws are framed with a view to satisfy the needs of differen t parties, would that not suffice to meet the ends of jus tice? My answer to this question also is the same, an emphatic no.No nation can be safe by the mere passing of equitable laws, rather it needs two more neces,.sary conditions; namely:- ( I) That adequate provision shall be made to see that the law in question is administered according to its spirit.Most excellent laws are but dead letters when

Page 75

..[ 65 ] they are not enforced according to the intentions of the framers.A physician may have in stock any amount of quinine pills but the whole lot js of no use if it is not.administered to the patients.A iaw in itself is absolutely nothing ; it is essential that a good law should also be enforced in the right spirit.Its result depends upon its proper enforcement.Even if the rights of minorities are protected by mea::1s of legislative action, but a proper enforcement of such a legislation is not provided for, there is no prospect of peace for the minorities.The League of Nations, in dealing with the question of pro tection for minorities, has also admitted that law alone is hardly worth while unless its operation in the manner intended can be properly watched.As an example, there is the case of Esthonia.When the League dem3.nded an evidence of its treatment of the minorities, the Esthonian Government at first refused to produce such.evidence and contended that the League was entitled to interfere only in the case of an infringement of the laws for the protection of the minorities.In his note on the reply of the Esthonian Government, the representative of the League, who was appointed to deal with the case, observed that the views of the Esthonian Government, if accepted, "would give the Council no power n to interfere with their actions until they proceeded to modify the constitution affecting the Minority.But if.without making any such change, the Esthonian Government con tinued to oppress the minorities, there would be no remedy open to the League.( Vide, Official Journal of the League of Nations, for November, 1922.) The League supported the views expressed by its agent, and rejected Esthonia' s reply with the remark that it did not ensure the safety of the minorities.The incident shows that aH reasonable people the world over are agreed that the mere justness of a parti-

Page 76

r 66 I •.c ul a r law docs not constitute a sufficient guarantee; it j eq u all y irnp ortant that p r ovision should bF; made fo r its d u e enfo r c einent.The Rajp al case* is of recent o�cur.re nce.AU the nc·ws p ap ers that are now united in thei r sup p ort of the Nehru- f {e por t , ag re< ·d that the object o f th e l a w in this case had been defeated.The same doo r i s o pen s till ; and it is essentia l that it should be closed.(2 ) The second essentia l is that the law in question sh o uld be made safe ag ains t future alteration fo r th e o b vi o u s r e ason, tha t i t is q uite eas y fo r a majorit y a t firs t t o fram e law s desired b y a minorit y in orde r to win the i r c on fid enc e , and late r or to re pea l the same when Self G o v ernmen t ha s been attained ; for, those who can make a la w ca n als o unmake it.I n th e new States , tha t wer e formed in Europe after t h e wa r , a two- fold provision ha s been mad e to protect th e ri g ht s o f minorities.Firstly , tha t th e law s sha ll b e p r o pe r l y e nforce d , and secondly , tha t th e law s shall r e m ai n inviolate.To $ecur e th e firs t end , th e Leagu e of N ati on s ha s bee n emp o ,vere d to hea r appeal s o f cases r e l ati n g t o minorities.I n th e even t o f th e minorities m aki n g an y com plain t to the League , it is empowered to a p p o in t a commission t o investigat e th e trut h o f the alleg ation s.Furthe r, the minorities have been given an eff e c ti v e share in the Governmen t i n orde r to enab l e the m t o watch the i r own interest s.I n Czechoslovaki a ,.f o r e x am p le, Rothunians who �ome of the Russian sto c k a n d possess the i r own culture , tongue and religion, have been granted full administrative powers in the i r own p a rt o f the countr y , thou g h they are no doubt subject to t h e --- - -----.*T , h i s is a w e l l -known c a s e i n the Laho r e High Court i n wh ic � Ra 1 pal, t h e auth ? r of a s currilo u s tra c t on �he li f e of the Pr oph e t ? 0 I s lam.was acqu it ted o n the ground th a t the r e w a s no provisi o n 1 l aw to d ea l w i t h s u c h o f fence s.

Page 77

·[ 67 l Czechoslovakian Government in the 1natters of general laws and foreign policy.This arrangement has been made in a predominantly Rothunian province.In other parts, however, where they are nowhere in a majority their privileges have been protected in other ways.lln order that their national tongue, religion, and civilisation might be adequately protected, it has been provided by means of statutory laws that Government shall give grants-in-aid to their national committees to run their own schools and religious societies.Secondly, it has been arranged for the minorities to reserve Government appointments in proportion to their numerical strength, and thus a reasonable proportion of the minorities is always to be found in the Government offices, who always take care to see that Lheir communal rights are nowhere ignored.Provisions have also been made to ensure that the laws shaH remain inviolate.It has been stipulated that no Government shall alter, or annul laws pertaining to minorities without the consent of the League of Nations.Under these conditions, no Government even if its majority should wish to change the laws, finds itself competent to do so in view of its constitution, and inter..national obligations; ,,nd in case it tries by force to break those laws, the other powers are there to see that it does not do so.( Vide, the Protection of Minorities).No PROTECTION OF MINORITIES IN THE NEHRU-REPORT.lln contrast to the above, strangely enough, the Nehru Committee makes no suggestion vvith regards to the pro tection of minorities.The Nehru--Report does not recom mend an autonomous Muslim Government in predomin antly Muslim provinces similar to that granted to the Russians in Rothunia, nor in areas where Muslims are in minority has it been provided that it shall be left to their

Page 78

( 68 ] own committees to solve their educational, religious and cultural problems, nor even has it been guaranteed that a re-distribution of provi...1ces shall not take place in such a way as to adversely affect the majority position of the Muslims in any of the provinces.Again, nowhere has assurance been given that the few Muslim demands, that have been partially accepted now, shall remain intact even in the future.It has been laid down that • • Parliament may, by law, repeal, or alter any of the provisions of the con�titution.Provided that the bill embodying such repeal or alteration shall be passed by both Houses of Parliament sitting together and at the third reading shall be agreed to by not less than two-thirds of the total num ber of the members of both Houses." ( J, T ide ,Vehru-Report.p.123); ,.vhile in the same la,,v it has been recommended that Muslims should get only one-fourth of the seats in the Central Legislature ( Ibid.p.54 ).Under these conditions even if no :\1uslim vote \vere to go over to the Hindus, and in addition even if five or six per cent.of the Hindu members were to pitch them selves against their co-religionists, even then, the Hindus can at any time withhold the rights that they are now con ceding to the Mussalmans; and it is in no way impossible for the Hindus to command two-thirds of the total votes.According to the Report, only 66l per cent.votes are required to effect a change in the constitutional law, and the Hindus are proposed to have 75 °; ) of the seats.Wi1l it then be difficult for the Hindus to effect a change in the constitution at any time they like, and leave the Muslims disillusioned? I think it has now been made abundantly clear that it makes no difference v v hether a majority is big or sma11, if there is a danger to its rights being infringed then there is always the need for protectvc 1neasures.And I have

Page 79

[ 69 ] also explained the causes which lead a majority to oppress a minority.I have also shown that mere laws are not enough.Two other conditions are.essential.First to ensure that the laws should be properly enforced, and one of the means to this end is that, in areas ,-vhere the minorities preponderate in the :r,opulation, the Govern ment should be left entirely in their hands, and where they do not so preponderate there they should at least have the right to appeal, and matters affecting their corn-· munal life should be left to be dealt ,vith by their com munal committees ; and in Government appointments they should be represented in proportion to their number.Secondly, it should be provided that the constitutional laws relating to minorities shall not be altered except under conditions which will ensure the consent of the minority concerned to such alteration.\.

Page 80

I • CJ1/\Pl'ER VI.Muslim Demands and the Nehru-Report.DETAILED STUDY.• 1 N the light of my criticism of the Neh � u-Report, the politically minded section of the public cannot but agree that the Report is not at all a satisfactory solution of our present problems ; nor can the Muslims accept it without vitaJly endangering their future.But as people at large are not, generally, so well acquainted with, or interested in political matters that they might be expected to apply principles to facts, I consider it necessary to review.in detail, the whole position '" ? ith regard to Muslim -demands and the Nehru--Report.As already stated, the Musiim demands are, as fol lows:- ( 1).The future Government of India shall be of a federal type, i.e., the Central Government should derive its powers from the provinces, and not the latter from the former.With the exception of those subjects, re garding which, for the purpose of joint administration.the provinces might delegate their po\\rers to a central authority, the residual powers should vest in the.provinces.(2) Reforms shall be extended to the N.W.F.Pro vinces; and, Sindh and Baluchistan shall be constituted into separate and independent provinces.(3) All communities shall be allotted seats, in local bodies, according to their respective numerical strength, except in the case of very small minorities who may be given a few extra.'3eats.

Page 81

[ 71 ) (4) In the central legislature, Muslim representation hall in no case be less than what they are entitled to no"' : in fact.in orde-r to safeguard their interests ade quately.it should be increased to one-third of the total nu111ber of seats.l5) Con1n1unal electorate iystem shall continue, that is.every con1munity shall choose its own representatives.ln the event of the afore-mentioned four demands being satisfied.one group from among the Muslims will be prepared to substitute separate electorate by joint elec torate system ,�tith reservation of seats.(6) Government �hall not interfere with religion, religious propaganda ai1d conYeJ sions, and further it shall enact no la,v relating to religion, social life or culture, as ,,·ould affect '"·holly or mainly any particular religious community.In order to ensure the strict enforcement of the above-mentioned conditions, it has been urged by the l\lussalmans that, ( i) each community shall b� allotted governmental posts on population basis ; and that.(ii) for introducing changes in the constitution of the Indian Government, it shall be provided that in the matter -of the laws pertaining to the rig-hts of minorities and pro lection thereof, no changes shall be introduced without the consent of the minorities themselves.From what I have studied of the constitutional law of the Czechoslovakian Republic, where the situation is more or less the same as it is in India, and further, from what I have seen of the Hindu activities during the past few weeks, I have decided to urge a further point, name ly, that it should be definitely laid down that the Central Covernment shall have no power to modify the terri-

Page 82

[ 72 ] torial limits of any province, the decision in such matte resting with the province concerned.Hav i ng enumerated these demands, I now procee d to discuss them severally, to see if they are legitimate, and if so, whether they are also essential.For, when deciding between rival claims, one has first to.see, whether or not, a claim has its basis in right; for, no one is j ustified, for the sake of his own interest, to force another to for ego his right.In the second place, it is equally important to see if the exercise of the right is also necessary ; for, it is not easy to decide a claim, unless the extent of da�age to the disputing parties, both in the event of its acceptance or re j ection, has been proper ly ascertained.As often as not, a sacrifice may be demanded of one to his disaster, while another per son.alrea dy master of the position, may be benef i tted by it.THE NEED FOR SPECIAL SAFEGUARDS.II think it wise to examine, at the very outset, if th conditions in India are such, as necessitate special pro tective measures for the Moslems, and if their continu ance as an isolated ininority is a necessity.I believe that it is a fact admitted by every Muslim, that under the present con d itions, the community cannot do without special safeguards.I have already stated that, of the many causes which tempt a ma j ority to oppress a minor ity, there are six main ones.Let us now examine if anY of the same exists in our country.A minority stands vitally in need of protective mea- sures under the following circumstances:- (i) Where the minori ty community held swaY over the country in the near or remote past, and the maj ority community believe, or are led to believe, that the minority had beer1 oppressing it.

Page 83

[ 73 l during its regime, it has been often found that the majority community upon its coming into power has.invariably tried to settle its old scores, whether real or imaginary, \vith the minority.Illustrations are not want ing in history.The Buddhists, as past records show, were completely annihilated by the Hindus in India, and so were the >.luslims by Christians in Spain.In our own days similar scenes have been repeated in Greece, Servia, Rumania and Bulgaria.vvhere the Turks pariicularly, and the l\ luslims generally, have fall en victims to the reprisals of the Christians, merely on the imaginary ground of their past oppression over their fore-fathers.Again, Germans are being harassed in Poland, part of which was for a long time under German domination.For the same reason.the German land-holders are being oppressed also in Czechoslovakia ; IVlagayrs are being maltreated in· Ru.mania ; l\1agayrs and Austrians in Yugoslavia ; and Austrians in Italy.These instances are before us.They warn us that one community does often harass another on account of imaginary or real grievances.We may now see that the same dangerous mentality prevails among the Hindus.To begin with, the Britishers in order to consolidate their ow-n domination had to paint the Muslim Emperors in very dark colours, so that Indians might forget their memories and attach themselves to the British Govern ment ; and now, follo"ving them, the Hindus with a view to strengthen the bonds of their nationality have, with very few exceptions, inost vigorously taken up the work of concocting stories of alleged oppression by Muslim Emperors.They have been trying to instil into the· minds of their younger generations, that it was the Muslim conquerors who destroyed the religion, culture, civilisa� tion and intellectual life of the Hindus, and that were it not for them, the Hindus would have been one of the

Page 84

[ 74 ] 1oremost people of the present time.Most of the Hindus, both men and women, are to-day burning with a spirit of vengeance against the Muslims on account of the imaginary wrongs committed by them.They most sin cerely believe, that the Muslims alone were responsible for their national downfall, and are convinced of the justice of rearing the foundation of their national progress upon the Muslims' ruin.The following incident would give an indication of the extent of this dangerous attitude.A relative of mine employed a Hindu laciy, there a convert to Christianity, to coach his children.She hailed from remote Mysore and was a highly educated woman.She was so much prejudiced against the Moslems that while teaching history to her pupils ,,vhenever she came across the story of any Moslem King she would skip over the pages, and when press�d by the boys, she would curtly say that she knew best which part was to be taught first and which was to be taught last.The present mentality of most of the Hindus can be best gauged by that of this woman who was a highly educated lady and had been to England several times.Why are they so much wroth against our dead kings? For no other purpose than to awaken their own people.And can the Mussalmans afford to shut their eyes to the dangerous awaken1n� that ¼"ill result from such ment ality? Certainly not.They are quite justified to deman d such special measures as will save their national exist ence from destruction? And no doubt, the responsibility for such a state of things lies in part '1vith the Britishers,.although not to the same extent as with· the Hindus.(ii) The second reason which leads a majority to at t � m.pt to destroy a mi � ority is cultural and social supe riority of the latter, which leads the majority to fear the minority.The present day Hindu-Muslim problem is not

Page 85

[· 75 ] without this aspect.It is needless to investigate the why and wherefore of the existing state of things, but it can hardly be gainsaid that the Muslims do happen to hold a position of real cultural and social superiority in India.There is a total absence of untouchability.A general feeling of social equality does exist among them to an appreciable extent.Also unlike the Hindus, remarriage of widows is more or less still in vogue among them, and they have comparatively few ceremonies to observe on occasions of marriage.In short, the_ cultural and social systems of the Muslims are based on a radically different standard, and the Hindus are fully conscious of the fact that neither can they destroy the l\1uslim culture and social system, nor can themselves go ahead with their ancient traditions in the presence of such factors.This is another reason for our apprehension that the Hindus might stand in the way of our free social and cultural development.(iii) The third reason that serves as an incentive to the majority to oppress a minority is an element of per manancy in the latter, i.e., the presence in it of some such quality as prevents it from losing its identity.Under such circumstances the majority, finding it impossible to absorb the minority, finally decides to wipe it out.This factor also does exist in the present situation.Islam enjoys a pre-eminence among the religions.inasmuch a.s it has laid down for its followers a special line of conduct relating to politics, society, manners and dealings.The Muslims, therefore, unlike the followers of other religions, cannot make any compromise in these matters and absorb themselves in any other culture.As a general rule, when the majority feels sure that there is nothing in the minority to make for its permanance, it cherishes the hope that in course of time the minority ".vill either merge itself in the majority or otherwise lose its identity, i.e., will aban-

Page 86

[ i6 J don some of its own peculiarities, and adopt some of the ways and customs of the majority, as it was the case with the ancient invaders of India.They accepted some of the deities of the Hindus, and the Hindus in turn bowed down before some of theirs.Similarly these invaders of ancient India themselves adopted a most destructive feature of the Hindu social system, viz., they entered the fold of one or other of the four castes.The Muslims, however, cannot do so, so long as Islam lives among them, and the Hind�s know full weil that so long as Islam flourishes in India, there is no chance of the l\llus lims becoming a prey to the inf l uence of Hindu civilisa tion and culture.And hence the •::a1npaign either to oust the Musljm population from India 0r to convert them to Hinduism.(iv) The fourth reason that tends to make the majority inimical to the minority is the presence in it of such potentialities as go to make it a progressive com munity, threatening the position of the majority and mak ing it afraid lest the minority should some day be convert ed into the majority.It, therefore, takes to repressive measures in order to bring about the annihilation of the minority.Such a condition also does exist in India.Islam being a powerful missionary religion, it has been maki�g spiritual conquests even during the days of its decline.The last few censuses bear testimony to the fact that Islam has been gaining in numbers not only by birth but also by conversion.It can, therefore, be easily realised that the Hindus cannot suffer this state of affairs to continue unchecked.In the event of the Hindu com munity coming to power, it will do its best to achieve by force what it could not do by religious propaganda ,.and no doubt, hundr.eds of measures could be devised, as would appear ostensibly just but would really aim at stopping conversion to Islam.Hence arises the necessity

Page 87

[ 77 ] for safeguarding the Muslims.It may be argued here, that the party system has always its basis in the mutual opposition of the majority and the minority, and the majority has never been found to destroy the opposing minority.True, but this is due to the fact that those minorities and majorities are liable to change places.A majority of to-day may be the minority of to-morrow and vice-versa.As a result of this change of positions, there is hardly any room for mutual animosities.In India the -conditions are radically different.Our party system is not based on political differences.Its origin is in reli gious diversity.Among such parties there can be no immediate change of positions.Although it is quite prob able that a powerful religion may effectively reduce the majority to a minority and then dominate the country for good.(v) The fifth reason for a majority to oppress a minority is the latter's attachment towards foreigners.What the majority wishes to see is that all its country men should be attached to itself.It cannot brook the sight of any community extending a friendly hand to out siders.But on account of its peculiar circumstances, a minority is sometimes obliged to keep in touch with foreigners.This makes the majority grow suspicious of its movements and fear that it might some time harm ' the majority with the help of the foreigners.In conse- quence, the majority fe·els always disposed to weaken the minority.There is no lack of precedents of such events.The Bulgarians were maltreated in Greece on the same grounds and in our times the Poles in Lithuania and the ' • Lithuanians in Poland have been suffering for the same reason.The same conditions are prevalent also in India.The Indian Muslims, in conformity with their religious traditions, consider the Mu.slims all over the world as their brethren, and feel most strongly moved by their woes and....

Page 88

t [.78 _] sufferings.These brotherly sentiments are reciprocated by the foreign Muslims, and even ·if they are not in a position to actively help one another, there is no doubt that they feel grieved to learn of their misfortunes.Under the circumstances the majority community in India is sure always to remain suspicious of the Muslims and ob struct their progress.This is not an imaginary fear.Do not the Hindus complain that Muslims do not regard themselves as the sons of the soi1 and are inclined to keep relations with foreigners? The Hindus may not be asking it in so many vvords, but the question, no doubt, arises in their minds-what will be the attitude of the Indian Muslims in the event of a war between India and Afghanistan, Persia or Arabia? Will they not support their brethren across the border? If they do, then cer tainly there will always be present an element of weak ness in the Government of India.God alone knows, what the Muslims will do if such a contingency arises ; but the suspicion which has 1nore than once found ex pression from the Hindu leaders will, no doubt, continue to obsess the Hindu minds, and they ,-vill naturally think it to be a service to the motherland to hamper the pro gress of the Mussalmans.I am at one with my Hindu compatriot in the opinion that the development of pat riotic sentiments within limits of justice and reason is essential for the purpose of Self-Government.But at the same time, I cannot understand how the Muslims could su p press their broader sentiments of affectionate attach ment towards the Muslims all over the world.They have acquired this mentality through centuries, and it has p ractically become their second nature.Nor should it be overlooked that I have qualified the sentiment of pat,.riotism by justice and reason.If, in near or remote future, India resolves to hoist the flag of • Om • on the Holy Kaba, as the Arya leaders have already declared it to

Page 89

[ 79 ] be their aim, the Muslims shall most undoubtedly not sacrifice their higher obligations to patriotic considera tions.( vi) The six ch cause of this suppresgion of a minority lies in the exploitation by the majority of the economic backwardness of the 1ninority.The majority under such circumstances is naturally afraid of losing its advantages in the event of an a'\'vakening among the minority com munity.It is anxious, therefore, to keep the minority backward.This factor also does no doubt exist now in India.Just as most of the ,vealth of Europe is due to the backwardness of Asia, so is most of the wealth of the Hindus due, directly or indirectly, to the backward ness of the Muslims.The Muslims are not traders, the· Hindus, therefore, monopolise all the advantages of trade.l\1uslims are not factory-owners, as a result, the whole profit of industry is being enjoyed by the Hindus.Muslims are few in the: higher professions, for example, law, medicine and engineering.Therefore.the Hindus are reaping the whole benefit of these professions.Muslims are neither financiers nor bankers.The banks, therefore, add only to the Hindu wealth.There are few Muslim contractors, the profit of this business also, there fore, goes to the Hindus.Muslims are backward in education.As a result, the Government posts mostly go to the Hindus, and they alone derive most of the ad vantages of the Universities.In short, in every economic field, Muslims are lagging behind, and the result is that Hindus are growing richer at their expense.The Hindus are, therefore, aware that an awakening among the Mus lims will mean loss to them as a portion of the country's wealth will then be appropriated by the Mussalmans.Under the circumstances, it is foolish to think that the Hindus will willingly and gladly allow the Muslims to go ahead.Would the Muslims give away their property to·

Page 90

• [ 80 ] lhe Hindus? If they would not, can they expect the Hindus to give up their property to the l\lluslims? When matters stand like this, it may be feared, and rightly feared that the Hindus in the event of coming to power.' will make every effort to perpetuate the backwardness of the l\1uslims.It ;s, therefor•�.indispensable that the Moslems should, from the very beginning, adopt such precautionary measures as may effectively prevent the Hindus from fulfilling their design, and may keep the avenues of work and progress open to the luslims.Certain people, eitber foolishly or in order to lull the Muslims to a sense of false security.argue that there are innumerable lines of progress befcre the country, and ·therefore the ways ! or the Musli1ns • progress are not barred.This is sheer nonsense.There are innumerable ways of progress before the world, but is it not a fact that European interests are obstructing the development of Indian industries? When the English industrialists, thousands of miles remote from India, cannot vie,v ,vith equanimity the industrial development of India, fearing lest it should affect their interests adverse1y.-will the Hindu traders living in India suffer to see their Muslim compatriots going ahead in the commercial field? Can they, again I ask, view with equanimity the replacement in Government offices, of their Hindu brethren by Musli m recruits, who no doubt cannot step in unless vacancies are made in the Hindu ranks? No Government Indian • or non-Indian, will create new posts, merely to accom- modate the Mussalmans.Is it not, therefore.important that rules should be 1:-1ade from the beginning in order to secure the rights of the Mussa1mans? From hypothesis, let us now come to facts.A study of the actual situation in India convinces us of the neces ,sity for special measures for the protection of Muslim rights.I do not think any Mussalman wi11 deny the fact

Page 91

[ 81 ] that the Hindu-Muslim relations are not to#day what they ought to be, and also that communal prejudices have been influencing both the parties.Take up, for an instance, Government employment.It is a veritable Hindu mono..poly throughout, to the prejudice of the rights of the Muslims.A Muslim.v.tho somehow or other chances to enter an office, finds tiis Hindu colleagues bent upon his removal.Recently, a Muslim �ember of the Bengal Legislative Council, put it very nicely that he wondered why a Muslim grows incompetent as soon as he is placed under a Hindu officer, while he grows efficient if placed under an Englishman.We have hundreds of such in stances also in the Punjab of capable Muslims, whose sterling worth had been recognised by English officers, suddenly turning grossly iricompetent as soon as placed under Hindu seniors.S01ne Hindus explain it away by saying that these are the tactics of Englishmen to keep the two communities hostile to each other.This does not, however, appeal to me.The point that has to be considered is whether the Hindus or the Englishmen stand to benefit by these so-called tactics.,If the former are the gainers, then it is foolish to impute motives to the Englishmen.And moreover, does it stand to reason that for this purpose the Englishmen should make only the Hindus their tools and never persuade the Muslims to run down the Hindu subordinates and expel them from offices? Yet a third point is that, none of the many Government officials who subsequently became national leaders, ever admitted that he had ever been asked to run down his Muslim subordinates and to patronise the Hindus.The communal prejudice has outgrown all proportions and there are facts in my possession to show how Hindu officers have openly asked their Muslim subordinates whether they would tender their resignations voluntarily

Page 92

I 82 J or await the institution of cases againts them.Unfortun.ately I have no remedy to suggest for such cases.Similar conditions prevail in the Education Depart ment.The doors of education are being shut against the Muslims.They are freely plucked in the examinations.Heads of certain departments openly tell the Muslim candidates that they will not let them pass and will cut them down in the viva-voce.A Government scholar on reaching the final stage finds his career completely ruined.Hindus do not make purchases from Muslim shops, while untouchability in the matter of food and drink is too well known to need repetition.It is little use glibly calling each other brethren on the platforms.Just witness the plight of those labouring Muslim millions whose homes echo the cry of want.The Hindu Baniyas have been sucking the blood of the Muslim peasant.Though the Hindu cultivators are also sharing the same fate still the ultimate result of the system being the annihilation of the Mussalmans, the Hindus oppose any legislation for the prevention of such a state of things.They allow the Hindu cultivators to suffer with the Mussalmans in the hope that they will be able ultimately to redress the condition of the Hindus.Muslim papers with far larger circulation than Hindu p&pers do not receive Government advertisements, while inferior Hindu papers are full of court notices which, in fact, are the chief source of the ir income.Questions relating to Muslim interest are denied attention in • the Councils, while everything pertaining to Hindu interests is pressed forward.A telegram to-day brings the news that the question of separation of Sindh was not even allowed to be put before the Bomb ay Council.In view of these circumstances, can any one make bold to say that the Muslims do not require measures of.protection, and again, any Mussalman in his

Page 93

[ 83 ] senses, afford to leave Muslim rights undefined and without reliable guarantees? Any body so doing, will be execrated by the posterity and will appear before h;s Lord as a criminal.

Page 94

C H A P T E R VII.Demand for a Federal Government.DETAILED STUDY-( Continued).1 HAVE already stated, the Muslims demand a federal type of Government for India, with fully autonomous provinces ; only such powers being delegated to the Central Government as the Provincial Governments may deem essential for good government.Subjects not mentioned in the constitutional laws, shall be deemed as vested in the provinces, which, in cases of exigencies.may, under special regulations, transfer any subject to the Central Body.The Central Government shall have no power to interfere with the internal affairs of the pro vinces.So far as I can see, the lvluslims in a body sup port this demand.At any rate, both the sections of the League do.The Nehru Committee has, however, turned down the proposal altogether, and, instead of a federal Government, proposed a unitary type of Government.In other words, under the proposed constitution, the central parliament is the supreme governing body which transfers certain powers to provinces.Under the first system, the one sponsored by the Muslim League, the Central Government cannot interfere with the internal affairs of the Provincial Governments, nor can it deprive them of any privilege, nor is it, in the event of any new work arising, entitled to undertake the same ; the Provincial Governments alone having the right to undertake it, or to transfer it to the Central Govern ment, according to the rules framed for the purpose, by the majority in the Provincial Council.On the other hand, according to the system sponsored by the Nehru

Page 95

[ 85 1 Committee.the Central Government is the supreme authority, with full power to interfere in the internal affairs of provinces, to deprive them of any p1ivileges whenever it chooses to do so, or, to alter the very form of the pro vincial governments.It can, if it likes, curtail the })owers of the Provincial Governments and extend its own.Rights to eve-�y new work will belong to the Central Govern ment, which will be competent to transfer it to the Pro vinces or to retain it by itself.Let us now examine the effects of these two proposals upon Hindu-Muslim relation.Muslim population in India is about 2S�lo of the whole, and however generously they may be treated, they are sure to remain a very small minority in the Central Government.The Nehru Com mittee proposes to grant them only 25 % of the seats in the Legislature.There will thus be 3 Hindus to 1 Moslem in the Central Parliament.The Muslim League demands a minimum of one-third of the seats for the Muslims.In this case, there will be 2 Hindus to 1 Mu&,lim in the Cen tral Body.In either case it is evident that the Muslim minority can do nothing against the Hindu majority.The Central Government will, therefore, necessarily be dom inated by the Hindus.Under the circumstances, with an omnipotent Central Government and the provinces reduced to mere agencies, the only possible result will be that the Government will be run by the Hindus ; and even if a few provinces are constituted as predominantly Muslim.it will be in the power of the Hindus to regulate thP Government according to their sweet will.The Nehru Committee has thus obviously paralysed the Muslims by rejecting the federal form of Government for India, ac cording to which all provinces stand as equal partners.Even if all the other demands of the Muslims were enter tained, but for this alone they will have no voice in the

Page 96

[ 86 ].Government of the country.For further elucidation, let us assume that all other Muslim demands have been acceded to.Let us examine how things will stand under the form of Government proposed by the Nehru Committee.According to the Muslim demands, of the provinces, Bengal, the Punjab, Sindh, Baluchistan and the N.W.F.Provinces shall be predominantly Muslim, while the U.P., Behar, Bombay, Madras, the Central Province and Assam shall be predominantly Hindu.According to the Nehru Committee's recommendation, the provinces in spite of certain powers and privileges, shall be mere agents of the Central Government, where the Hindu element will preponderate.Under such conditions, it may easily be seen that, there will be nothing to prevent the Hindus from having their way in all matters.For example.the Punjab and Bengal Governments might resolve to give to the Muslims their due share in the University or decide to increase their representation in the services in proportion to their population and there upon the Ce�tral Government might step in and say that the measures were communal in their nature and must not be proceeded with.The two Provincial Governments might refuse to be bullied, and then, as a result, the Central Government might move a bill proposing to de prive the two provinces of certain privileges or to alter their constitution ; for, according to it they would have proved themselves unfit to govern.What will then the position of the Muslims be? It is useless to ask why such a contingency should arise.Does not the Govern..ment even now supersede Municipalities for some alleged mistakes? With the Central Government as the supreme authority, the provinces would be reduced to the position of mere Municipalities.Whatever powers might be dele --.gated to them, they would be nothing more than agents,

Page 97

[ 87 ] • and as such liable to be deprived of their powers by the Central Government-their real master.What then will be left to the Muslims? FATE OF MUSLIM MAJORITY IN BENGAL AND THE PUNJAB.Further.according to the Nehru Constitution, the Central Government shall have the power to modify the territorial limits of the provinces.The Punjab and Bengal are at present predominantly Muslim provinces.If the Central Government resolves upon a territorial redistribu �ion of the provinces and incorporate Assam to Bengal, or separate the Oriya districts from Bihar and incorporate them to Bengal ( on the plea that Oriyas being a small community cannot have a separate province of their own, and it is� therefore, decided that they should all be brought together under Bengal), the Mussalmans will be left helpless, and by this one single change apparently non�communal, the Muslim majority in Bengal would be reduced to a minority, and all the privileges which the Muslims would have secured.would naturally go over to the Hindus.Similarly changes might be wrought in the Punjab.The U.P.is a very large province with a popu1ation almost double that of the Punjab.The people of the districts of the Mianwali, the Rawalpindi and Allock, are more akin to the Afghans than to the people of the other districts of the Punjab in their social life and customs, and similarly Dera Gazikhan has close affinity with Baluchistan.Now, if the Central Government, at any future time, should decide that those districts of the Punjab, which have affinity with the Afghans, shouid be annexed to the Frontier Provinces, and the district of D·era Gazikhan to Baluchistan, say, what would then be left of the Muslim majority in the province? And further, if the same Government were to direct that the districts of

Page 98

f BB I M..,.rut.M11znfl ·rnagar.Arnbnl:i and JJ -)hi hould b..t1n..n :x,·d to dH· P1u,j�b, w! uJd not th_., J --m majority in tlu provir1cc h • at ,,nc..c...c nv · rt ""d into a minority] Ancl with tlH: Musfjrn.rnnj,Hity ir th....two Mu Jim pro vin ·R c-ornp),::1,-ly d ·Rtrn of aJJ the hop • of fr..pro r nt r tnin..d l,y t hc, MuaJirnH I Sirnilar)y anstitution propo d by th Nehru l{c·port th ·r<� rH • r/'lany oth..r av --nu..op n for the-.entraJ (�ovr<�nrnf'nt c:ith _.r to cornp] ""t..Jy aboli h the Mu9Ji,n provinces of the Punj, h and B ngal or to make the f linduH prc·dorninant i n th m.But und r th feclt:raJ form of (�ovc;rnrnent dr·mand d b y th..Mu lim , such ,-vc·ntur,litie;s wiJJ b<· ,thoi� ·th =-r irnpo ibl.., b cau undc·r a federal kYfil rn of (�,,vernm nt.th provinc will be the rc;a] rnaslcrs r1nd the entr 1 Gov rnm nt will have only dcJegate<l authority with pow r to int rf..r only in rnatter!i transf rr<·<l to it ·ontro) b y th provinc s thcm}u·lv<:fL /\� such, it shall hav no pow..r to tan1p r with th<� territorinl Ji111its of any I rovin · without it con sent.nor lo dt'.priv,..it of auy of it pow r on th all ga tion of tnis�govern,,u..nt.1t cnnnot b..urg J h ·r that, when th ntral Gov�rnrn nt is th supr n1 h ad alik of th 1-Iindu provinces and th Muslirn provinces, what reason have th MusJims for con1plaint? I· or, th simple reason is that I linclu-Muslim ·r lations ar not cordial.nor is there any likelihood of their improv ment in th n ar future.And even if th mutual relations should show some im- 'provement.the chang unclc..r th existing conditions can hardly b depended upon, as th history of the last fifteen years shows that they undergo changes several times a year.Further.it is a strange irony of fate that the Muslims are always th losing party, whether their rela-

Page 99

[ 89 ] tions are cordial or strained.It is therefore, natural, that Muslims should be apprehensive of the Central Govern ment and not the Hindus.The Muslims of the Punjab may well fear that the Hindu Central Government Plight convert the province into a Hindu province, but there is no ground for the Hindus of the· U.P.to be afraid of a Central Government in which Hindu element preponder ates.To argue, therefore, that the system would affect all uniformly is mere deception.Neither can it be urged that, in the event of such -circums�ances arising, the Governor-General of India or the Government of Great Britain will interfere, for the simple reason that the �en, who are not prepared to meet the reasonable demands of the Muslims to-day, can hardly be expected to do so in future.Besides.can we afford to leave such an important issue for the Governor ·General alone to decide? If we have so much trust in the judgment of a fore1gner, what justification is there for this great indignation against the Simon Commission which consists not of one but of seven persons, whereas -in future, the Governor-General will be single to decide the issue.It should also be borne in mind in this con nection, that under a constitutional Government, the Gov ernor-General will be no more than a mere figure-head.It may be urged that, in order to dispel the fears of the Mussalmans and to �ake their position secure, pro vision may be made in the constitution, that the Central Government shall have no power to 1nterfere with the provincial Governments, nor shall it undertake any terri torial redistribution without the consent of the provinces concerned.To this our simple answer is that if the Nehru Cominittee recommendations be so amended as to remove their defects, we can have little objection to

Page 100

...[ 90 ] accept the same.What we contend is that in its present form, the Report is unacceptable to the Muslims.With regard to this particufar issue, however, I do not agree that the rights of the Muslims will be secured even by the introduction of the proposed a�endments.For even if the proposed amendments are incorporated in the constitution, what guarantee is there that the constitution itself will not be changed in future? �'hen the supreme authority will lie with the Central Government with power to alter the constitution, it will certainly be competent to change these laws in future and arrogate to itself the power to interfere in the affairs of the provinces in case of necessity, and also to alter their territorial limits.Thus so long as the Central Government wields the supreme authority, there will be no real safeguards for Muslim rights.The remedy lies only in vesting the pro vinces with supreme power.I wonder how a section of our politicians has sought to magnify the merits of the Nehru-Report, which as it appears to me, has only served unnecessarily to inflame the Muslim opinion by disregarding their rights in some non--essential matters.If the Nehru Committee had simply recommended a Central Government with supreme powers, and then granted to the provinces complete auto nomy, and yielded to the Muslim demand for separat.! electorates, and majority of representation in the Punjab and Bengal, even th{.n the Hindus would not have suffered in the least.For, after the attainment of Dominion Status, they could have easily withdrawn all the privileges of the Muslims whenever they wished to do so.But it seems that a mean spirit of bargaining had swayed them against their better judgment so much so, that they did not feel disposed even by a word of mouth to make any con cession to the Muslims.!It reminds me of the story of I

Page 101

[ 91 ] the Baniya who in good humour used to say to the Afgan Grandee,-'· Well Khan Sahib ! your property is PlY pro perty and my property, Ha r Ha ! Ha !.'' The Baniya could not even in jest bring himself to say that his pro perty was the Afgan' s property.He therefore broke off with a laugh.Similar has been the case with the Nehru Committee.It could not even in jest offer to the Muslims their just rights.Barring the question of the power of the Central Government, had the Committee conceded to the Muslims all their other demands, then in all likelihood the bulk of the Muslims would have been effectively be fooled, and all the efforts of the few intelligent minds among them, who could divine the real purpose, would perhaps have been of no avail to undeceive the Mussal mans.ADVANTAGES OF FEDERAL GOVERN\.1ENT.Having exposed the unsoundness of the Nehru Com mittee's proposals, I now proceed to describe the farm of Government India would have, in the event of the Moslem demand being accepted.The provinces shall form separate autonomous Governments, which, in the best interests of India as a whole and their own, shall as a body delegate to a Central Government certain powers, necessary for the administration of such All-India subjects as All-India national force ( the provinces may have forces of their own for local needs ), railways, post and te1e graphs, customs, foreign affairs, currency, etc.If the Central Government wants to get additional powers or to open any new department of work which was not pre viously foreseen, it can do so only by the provinces meet ing in a conference and deciding in accordance with cer tain prescribed rules to grant such powers to the Central

Page 102

r 92 1 Government.Under this arrr.1ngr-,rnent, F;at:h provint:e will hav the fullcst opportunity for d<; veloprn�nt in it& own way.·rhc Muslim provinces wiJI have no fear of inter• f ·rcncc from a f lindu Central C�ovcrnrnent, and the Hindu provinces will not havc their progress retarded.An ob j ccti on may be raised that under such an arrangement, redress wi11 be impossible in case of oppression of the Muslims in a 1-lindu province.The answer is plain.ln any case the Central Government will be dominated by the 1-lindus.The Mussalmans can have no hope of re dress from such a Government.If the Hindus would be prepared to listen to the complaints of the Mussa1mans, then the Government of the province concerned would naturally be the proper body for them to approach.By vesting the real authority in the Central Government, there will be no single province in which the Muslims will have free exercise of power.Another advantage of this form of free Provincial Governments will be that, it will restrain the Central Gov ernment from taking any unjust action.For it will know that the expansion of its powers depends solely on the votes of the Provincial Governments.If it harassed a province where a certain religion preponderated, it would naturalJy be difficult for it to obtain more powers.In this connection, it must also be borne in mind that, according to this arrangement, there shall be five Muslim provinces as against eight or nine Hindu pro..vinces, thus securing for the Muslims, rights in excess of their proportion in the population, i.e., more than a third.And as regards the granting of additional powers to the Central Government, it should b� provided, as in the case of other Governments, that such extension will depend upon the vote of three-fourths of the provinces.◄ 'This will make the Muslim position still more effective.

Page 103

[ 93 ] FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NOT DETRIMENTAL TO ANY CoMMUNlTY.After having explained the necessity and the ground of the Muslim demand for federal government, and how without its being conceded, the Muslim rights can never be secure, and also how its rejection by the Nehru Com mittee amounts to a virtual refusal to protect the Muslim rights, I now proceed to consider the other aspect of the question, viz., the justice of the demand.In order to decide this, we have to consider, firstly, whether the demand irnolves the infringement of others· rights ; and secondly.whether it is detrimental to the progress and development of the country.In the event of the answer to either of these questions being in the affirmative, we shall have to consider whether the advantages accruing to the l\luslims outweigh the loss that the acceptance of their demand would entail to the country as a whole, or to any community in particular.The first point, namely, whether the interests of any other community is likely to suffer, does not arise at all.For under a federal type of Government no community stands to lose.The Hindus, who preponderate in India, shall continue to enjoy such preponderance in the Central Government.As for the provinces, Hindus shall pre� dominate in those provinces where they are in a majority and similarly the Mussalmans in the predominantly Mus lim provinces.Thus, under this system, there will be no loss either to the Hindus or to any other community.The acceptance of the Muslim demand will, therefore, lead to no infringement of the rights of any other com munity.The demand is, in fact, not a prayer for any concession ; it is a demand for the mere protection of

Page 104

[ 94 J their rights.And if the 1-Iindus are not pr<...pared trJ grant • to the Muslims their just rights, which entail no sacrifice on the part of the Hindus, and which are rneant mer ly to afford protection to the minorities, then they should never hope to secure the co-operation of such rninorities.FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NO BAR TO PHOCH£SS.As regards the second point that the demand in question may hamper the country's proriress, suffice it to say that the federal form of government is not a new experiment in any way.On the contrary.it has been tried long and proved to be the best form of Government.The British Commonwealth of Nations itself is a sort of Federation, in the free working of which, the C ·ntral Government does not interfere.The experiment.how ever, has been made with the best result in the United States of America, where from the beginning the very basis of the constitution was laid on federal lines.·rhis country has had a career of uninterrupted progress and is to-day the wealthiest and foremost power.It is hardly a matter of 25 years, when the British Empire used to build a navy as large as the cornbined fleets of two major naval powers, but to-day even this vast Empire in the presence of the United States has to recede from the field of competition.Only recently, a Labour leader, in course of a speech declared that, it would be a mad Government that would provoke the United States of America and land itself into difficulty.1---low can it there- fore, be said, in the face of such a successful experiment, that under a federal system, a government fail to crrow.n in power? This form of Government obtains in South Africa, Australia and Switzerland as well.And although in South Africa and Australia, the British constitution has played an important part in moulding the form of the � focal governments ; and Switzerland, because of the small�

Page 105

[ 95 ] ness of its area, has made certain laws which cannot be operated in bigger countries, the Corm of government in all these countries is nevertheless on federal lines, and is being successfully worked.Apart from the-,e, there has come into being a new State, namely, that of Cz(•cho slovakia, where a novel experiment jg being carried on.The Government of the country as a whole is not on federal basis, but in the province of Ruthenia, the people who were afraid of oppression have been granted a com pletely autonomous Government with which the Central Government has promised never to interfere.The Mus salmans can have no objection to such an arrangement provided that the Hindus would agree.The five Mus)im provinces may then constitute a part of India on a federa'I basis, with the Hindu provinces under a strong Central Government.In that case also, the Muslims will willing.ly undertake, on behalf of the representatives of the Muslim provinces, not to interfere in those affairs of other provinces, in respect of which their provinces enjoy full autonomous powers, just as the Ruthenians under took not to vote in the Central Parliament in those affair� of other provinces, in respect of which the Central Gov.ernment did not interfere with their own Government.( The Czechoslovakian Government, however, inspite of this undertaking, later on, very generously gave to the Ruthenians, the right to have a say in all affairs of the Central Government ).FORM OF FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN INDIA.Though it is hardly the place to discuss the form of federation that might be successfully established in India, yet, since it is possible that the present proposals will be criticised on the ground of absence of such a discus sion, I consider it necessary to say that in view of the special circumstances of India, the form of Government

Page 106

[ 96 1 obtaining in the United States of America would be the one best suited to our country.The United States are similar to India, in vastness of size and diversity of races and religions of its population.It may, however, be pro vided that no province shall have the right to secede from the federation.Also, it may not be necessary, that in the casfl of India, exactly the same powers should be granted to the Central Government as is the case in the United States.Larger powers may be granted in the case of India.Only, it has to be seen that the powers of the provincial Governments regarding internal admin istration suffer no demunition.I believe, I have successfully proved that the ques tion of federation is a question of life and death for the Indian Muslims.I have also made it abundantly clear that in a federal form of government �or India, the Hindus will have nothing to lose, and that from a political point of view, there is no harm in accepting such a form of Government.I would now conclude this chapter with this warning to the Moslems that they should bear in mind that of all their demands, this one for a federal government is the most vital.If they secure this, they will have nothing to fear even if their other demands fail to meet with acceptance.But if they fail to secure full acceptance of this demand, their lot is full of misery, God help them.

Page 107

CH AP T E R YIU.Demand for' Three New Muslim Provinces.DETAILED STUDY-( Continued ).{t, HE second demand of the Muslims relates to the formation of three new Muslim provinces, firstly.by extension of the Refo1ms to the N.W.F.Provinces and Baluchistan, and secondly, by the constitution of Sindh into a separate independent province.The Nehru Committee recommends extension of the Reforms to the N.W.F.Provinces.Its references to Baluchistan, however, are aJnbiguous.From some parts of the Report, it appears that the province has been re commended for a separate Government, while elsewhere, where the question of representation has been dis cussed, no mention has been made of Baluchistan.Whether the omission was unintentional or intentional cannot be ascertained.To forget to mention a whole province is indeed strange on the pa1 t of a committee that sat specially to decide grave political issues.In the matter of Sindh, the Nehru-Report lays down that it shall be constituted into a separate province pro vided, (i) that its financial condition is such as to enable the province to undertake its burden, or the people under take to bear the financial charges cons!dered adequate by the Nehru Committee, (ii) that no new difficulty arises which may be found insurmountable, and (iii) that they also hint ( though they have tried to conceal it ), that the con stitution of Sindh into a separate province does not neces sarily mean that it shall be a fully independent province.They write :-· • We might add that the separation of an area and the formation of a new province does not neces-·

Page 108

[ 98 ] sarily imply a separate economic life.Nor does it mean a duplication of all the organs of government.For in stance it is quite possible for one High Court to serve more than one province." ( Nehru-Report, p.68.) As a result of the acceptance of the Muslim demand, the Punjab, Bengal, Sindh, Baluchistan and the N.W.F.Provinces shall form five separate independent provinces.But according to the Nehru-Report, as I will explain later on, the Muslim element at least in Bengal shall be weakened ; the N.W.F.Provinces shall get complete in dependence ; regarding Baluchistan the committee is silent, while the independence of Sindh is doubtful, in asmuch as the conditions laid down are such that, I have reasons to suspect that Sindh shall never be made indP pendent, and if it :is at all separated.its independence will be merely nominal.,In the first place, the fear of ·' some instrumount able difficulties.'· expressed by the committee is in itself a hint to the Hindu agitators to keep quiet for the pr� sent inasmuch as the matter lies in the hands of their own kith and kin, who would be able in future to create any amount of " difficulties." I do not understand this fear of '' insurmountable difficulties '· in connection with the separation of Sindh, whereas they do not apprehend any such..difficulties " with regard to the separation of Karnatic.And, in fact, throughout their recommendation for future government in India they have nowhere else used such expression.Its use in this particular occasion is, therefore, a clear anticipation of formidable Hindu opposition to the Muslim demand.An argument of the same type is ebodied in the suggestion that, Sindh could be separated provided the country's financial condition permitted such a change,

Page 109

[ 99 ] or the people undertook to bear the burden.Here is another obstacle.For, it is possible that the financial commission deputed to make enquiries might decide that the province is utterly unfit financially for a separate Government.And, if the people volunteered to bear the responsibility, a costly form of Government might be proposed, which it would be beyond their means to carry on.In fact, the Commissioners have already turned down their joint Hindu-Muslim prayer " to cut their coat according to their cloth." ( Ibid.p.69.) From the above, it is clear that every effort will be made to prevent separation of Sindh, and these assur ances are a mere eye�wash.Let me not be accused of undue suspicion.As it is not a private affair, but a national settlement, it is of paramount importance to scan and consider every word and phrase.One, who does not do so, is a traitor to his people.Turkey, Arabia, Persia and Egypt have suffered serious losses through their sheer folly of not scrutinising the terms of pacts, and treaties, and it will be really unfortunate if lessons of the past were lost on the Muslims.The third point, to which the committee has hinted at, is that it is not necessary to grant full autonomy to Sindh ; for autonomy does not necessarily imply a separate economic life, nor does it mean a duplication of all the organs of Government.II fail to understand how a pro vince, without fiscal autonomy, can be called independ ent, while the very object of autonomous Governments is the attainment of economic and civic freedom,-poli tical freedom being only a means to the end.As without the latter, there is neither economic nor civic freedom, peoplo naturally agitate for their political emancipation.To make a province economically dependent on another province means that there is no real autonomy for it.

Page 110

[ 100 ] From what the committee has said about Sindh, it pains me to find that, the provnice would be refused independence on the ground of.financial incapacity, but if the people undertake to bear the burden, then such an unweidly machinery of administration would be recom mended that it might not be possible for them to carry on; and when, as a consequence, the people of Sindh would be despaired of an autonomous Government, they would be offered as an alternative the form of Govern..ment contemplated in the passage :-'' We might add that the separation of an area and the formation of a new province does not necessarily imply a separate economic life.Nor does it mean a duplication of al1 the organs of Government.For instance, it is qu·te pos sible for one High Court to serve more than one pro vince." ( Ibid.p.68.) It is clear that� a disappointed people with little hope of getting the ,vhole, will be glad to strike a bargain ; and as a result, Sindh will be left with a sort of semi-independent Government.FATE OF MUSLIM MAJORITY IN BENGAL AND THE PUNJAB.I have already pointed out that the Nehru Com mittee has left a door open to reduce the Muslim majority in Bengal into a minority.The following quotation from thei..t Report makes my contention clearer :- " Our colleague, Mr.Subhas Chandra Bose, is how ever satisfied that the Oriya speaking areas should be amalgamated and constituted into a separate province, if this is financially possible.He is further of opinion that the demand for the amalgamation of the Bengali speaking tracts in Assam, and Behar and Orissa is a , reasonable and legitimate one." ( Ibid.p.63 & 64.) The committee has, very cleverly, avoided entering into a discussion of the de�and, urged by Mr.Subhas

Page 111

[ 101 ] Chandra Bose; obviously, it was afraid of provoking pub lic prot�sts.But by urging this view, they have simply left the door open for further developments.In the Report they observe that the redistribution of provinces should be made on • • linguistic consideration '' and according to the wishes of the majority of the people." They have also agreed that the language of these people is Bengali, and also that they desire an amalgamation with Bengal.When we read the above with the opinion of the committee, '' that their must be a redistribution of provinces,'' we may clearly perceive this underlying intention to bring about such a change in Bengal, that would strengthen the Hindu element as against the Muslim population.This observation of the Report does not exclude even the Punjab.And whether or not, such idea was in the minds of the compilers of the Report, the fact is that a movement in the direction is now already afoot.The Punjab national party has already endorsed this view of the Nehru Committee with the proviso that the western districts should be annexed to the N.W.F.Provinces, and the Meerut division should be annexed to the Punjab.In other words, the nationalist party agrees to the pro posal of the Nehru�Report on condition that the Muslim majority in the Punjab should be smashed, and replaced by a Hindu majority.One cannot say if this movement is going to make a headway.At any rate, it has already entered the sphere of practical politics, and if the central Hindu majority feels disposed to effect such a redistribu tion, there is hardly anything to prevent it fro� doing so.It thus comes to this that where the Muslims had pressed for the formation of five independent Muslin1 provinces, such as, the Punjab, Bengal.Sindh, Baluchis..tan, and the N.W.F.Provinces, the Nehru-Report pro-

Page 112

[ 102 ] poses to make Sindh a semi-independent province ; and indicates its intention of converting the Bengal Muslim majority into a Hindu majority which, according to its own dictum, cannot be rejected.Further in the Punjab there has already been started a movement which, it is not in the power of the Muslims, to check.Thus, what the Report gives to the Mussalmans is, in short, a semi independent Sindh, a Hindu Bengal, and a Hindu Punjab.There remains the question of the N.W.F.Provinces.and Baluchistan.The case of the latter has been left ambiguous.Even if it is granted independence, th-e Muslims shall have only two minor provinces, viz., the N.W.F.Provinces, and Baluchistan, which would only serve as a route for a most pathetic retreat reminding the Muslims that, as a punishment for their blindly throw ing away what God had given them, they should now withdraw themselves by the same way through which they came.MUSLIM DEMAND REASONABLE.Having explained the difference between the Nehru Committee proposals and the Muslim demand, I now pro ceed to discuss whether the Muslim demand is at all a reasonable one.It is admitted on all hands, that people, with a distinctive religion and culture, should be afforded opportunities for free and unrestricted progress and de..velopment, or else, the door is opened for disorder and troubles, and peace becomes impossible.In Europe, wherever there is a diversity of tongue and culture, separate territories have been formed aflording the people opportunities for free national development.I have already cited the instance of Czechoslovakia, where, the Rothunians have been allowed to enjoy autonomy in their internal affairs.The component states of the United

Page 113

[ 103 ] States of America are running on the same lines.They began as separate entities with different cultures and religions.It was, therefore, thought wiser to leave them alone than to break them up in order to build a united Government.The Muslim demand is, therefore, quite reasonable, and arises for the necessity of keeping alive their distinctive culture and national traditions, and of saving their national spirit from extinction.The same necessity, which impels India to seek emancipation from British influence, also impels the Muslim to seek at least partial independence in those provinces where they pre ponderate.If this need is an artificial one in the case of the Muslims, !he same is true in the case of India.But I do not intend to enter here into a detailed discus sion of this question.I propose to do so in the chapter dealing with reservation of seats, where an almost similar line of argument has been taken.MUSLIM DEMAND INFRINGES NO-BODY'S RIGHT.Now the only question, that remains to be considered, is the justice of the demand.To me the claim appears to be just and proper both as a matter of right, and also from the political point of view.As a matter of right, because the demand involves no infringement of others' rights.In withholding representative Government from the N.W.F.Provinces there is, on the contrary, a denial of the rights of the people of that province.As regards Sindh, the Nehru-Report itself has admitted ( 1) that the province has a separate language, (2) that its connection with Bombay is artificial, (3) that the distance from Bom bay is too great, (4) that its separation will infringe no body's rights, and (5) that in the event of its not being granted a separate Government, a great injustice will be done to its people.As regards Baluchistan, it is already a

Page 114

1.I 04 ] separate province, and as such there is no dang<;r t,., any co�munity in the event of representative (�ovcrnrnent being granted to it.It is groundless to hold that the interest of the 1-findua would suffer at the hands of the Muslim majority if Sindh be made a separate independent province.If not, the same objection can be raised in respect of the Muslim minorjti<.;s in Bombay, Madras, the United Provinces, and Behar, where they are actually in a greater danger.For even under a federal system, the Central Government shall c<:,r tainly wield an enormous influence, and here the Hindu elements are bound to preponderate.The second objection that Bombay having spent a large amount of money in Sindh, the latter province cannot claim a separate Gov ernment.This is also untenable.It is just like the plea of those Englishmen who argue that India cannot be granted self-government as the English traders and capi talists have sunk a vast capital in the country.Had the expenditure upon Sindh been so lar�e, the Hindus of Bombay would have been foremost to demand the separa tion of Sindh.They are, on the other hand, mo8t.anxious to keep the province as a dependency.That clearly goes to shovv that the money apparently spent in Sindh is bringing in a rich harvest.The fact that Sindh could not grow in prosperity with a port like Karachi leads one to suspect that Bombay was thriving at the expense of Sindh, and so in order to maintain its pros perity jealously stood on the way to the development of Karachi.In short, if Bombay has spent directly one rupee on Sindh it has had indirectly two rupees back from that province, and here 1ies the secret of the anxiety of Bombay to keep the province under its heels.Both the objections are, therefore, groundlc·�s, and nobody's rights wiJI be infringed if Sindh is constituted into a separate province.

Page 115

[ 105 ] POLITICAL ASPECT OF THE DEMAND.Let us now consider the political aspect of the ques tion.It would be bad politics to keep the two provinces in their present state of bondage, and real statesmanship would be to grant them independence.If the claims of Sindh be ignored, a fierce storm of agitation may well be apprehended.This has been admitted by the Nehru Report also.And in the event of the N.W.F.Provinces and Balu chistan being denied a representative form of Govern ment, both the provinces, being situated on the border, are likely to become hot beds of foreign intrigues.A sound policy, therefore, lies in keeping the bordering pro vinces thoroughly satisfied.Otherwise such provinces afford fertile grounds for enemy's activities, and in con sequence, the country is divided against itself, thus weakening the Government.Bordering provinces kept in l a position of inferiority would not consent to remain at tached to India ; and it is not improbable that they might join hands with other powers to secure their freedom.Evidently, therefore, it will be bad politics to deny auto nomy to the N.W.F.Provinces and Baluchistan.Such action will not only pave the way for a civil war in India, but will serve to plant in India advance ports of foreign powers.II think I have conclusively proved that the demand for three new Muslim provinces is just, and no body stands to lose if the same is satisfied, al)d that from a political point of view also its advisability is unquestion able.The rejection of so reasonable a demand shows that the Nehru-Report is a product of communal bias.So long as the majority continues to be so prejudiced, it rannot inspire the minority with any degree of confidence.

Page 116

c: I I A P T E R IX.Reservation of Seats on Population Basis.DETAILED STUDY (Continued).U, HE third demand of the Mussa1mans relates to the right of representation in proportion to the numerical strength of each community, except :n the case of very small minorities, who Rhould be granted representation somewhat over and above their dues.This concession.if allowed, should be reciprocal, i.e., the Hindus in predominantly Muslim provinces should be granted the same concessions as the Muslims in predominantly Hindu.provinces.In other words, this demand se ks to secure to every important community the right of representation accord ing to its numerical !Jtrength, so that one community may not deprive the other of its legitimate rights through underhand tactics.The Nehru Committee holds it as politically un sound that the rights of any com1nunity should be de finitely fixed.The most that could be done, in their opinion, was to fix the proportionate rights of very smaH minorities.But it rlisapproves of the suggestion of giving to any community more than its due share of representation.It must be clearly understood that protection of rights in roatters connected with elections is effected by the reservation of seats ; that is, it is definitely laid down that a certain percentage of the total number of members must go to a certain community, and constituencies are also assigned where no one other than a member of the same community could stand as a candidate for election....

Page 117

r [ 107 1 Fixing of rights, in ()ther words, means assignment of constituencies for each community from which none but a member of the same community could stand as a candidate for election.Thus according to the Nehru-Report, the minontles, in provinces other than the Punjab and Bengal, may have seats reserved in proportion to their numerical strength, if they so desire.According to this rule, there is to be open competition between the Hindus and the Muslims over the seats in the Punjab and Bengal, without any restric tion whatsoever.If the N.W.F.Provinces, Baluchistan and Sindh are formed into separate provinces, then in these provinces, the Hindus shall have the option to have seats reserved for· themselves on population basis.and to fight for additonal seats "�ith the Muslims.In other pro vinces the Muslims also shall enjoy similar rights.lln other words, according to the above recommenda tion, not only the demands urged by the Muslim League have been left unsatisfied, but even their present rights have been taken away from them.The Muslim League had demanded safeguards for what the Muslims were already enjoying, and for additional seats the League demanded that the Muslims should be left free to fight it out with the Hindus ; the same.::oncess1ons to be granted to the Hindus in provinces where Muslims form an over whelming majority.But the Nehru Committee would give to the Mussalrnans only such representation as they are entitled to on the population basis.The result is that in the United Provinces, the Muslims are occupying at present 30% of the seats in the Council, but according to the Nehru-Report, theh representation shall be reduced to 15 % with the right to win additional seats in open contest, if they so choose.Similarly in Behar, Madras, Assam and Bombay, the Muslims form less than 10, 6 t

Page 118

[ 108 ] 21, and 20�� respectively of the population but they occupy 20, 12, 30, and about 33 % of the seats respectiv�ly in the Councils.The community will have in future their n1embership reduced to the population ratios.In short, according to the recommendations of the Nehru Com..mittec Muslim representation in the different provinces shall be reduced by one..half to one-third of its existing number ; and in exchange of this loss, the Muslims in these provinces and in the Punjab and Bengal will be given the right to contest for additional seats in the respective Councils.The above apportionment reminds me of the story of that prudent Raja who, as the legend goes, was pleased to make a gift to his priest of a cow that had been lost a year before.The Raja's son who excelled his father in caution, suggested that the priest should be given the CO\V that had died two years before instead of the one lost a year ago.The Lucknow Pact had aimed at throttling the very life out of the Muslim nction, the Nehru-Report was pro ceeded to skin the poor community altogether.I fail to understand i.he reason why the Muslim sup porters of this Report have taken up that attitude, when they can easily see that they have been deprived of something real ; and what they have been promised in return, is a mere shado\v.In the eight Hindu provinces.Muslim representation has been reduced by nearly one half; that is, of the aggregate 24% of Muslim representa tion in all the Hindu provinces, their share has been re duced to 14 % only.It has been argued in this connec tion that the right given to the l\lluslims to contest seats other than those reserved for them has opened a new avenue of progress for them where they can successfully beat their Hindu rivals The �rgument is the outcome

Page 119

[ 109 ] either of sheer ignorance, or of lack of commonsense, or of knowledge of past history.SAFEGUARD IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT RESERVATION.( First Argument}.The Nehru-Report itself falsifies the principle ex pounded by it.It has been urged, as already men�ioned, that it is advantageous for the Muslims to abandon the system of reservation of seats because in this they, in consequence of open contest, would be in a position to wrest more seats than they could claim on population basis.The Nehru Committee considers it to be a sound argument and thinks that it has been generous to the Muslim, inasmuch as it has opened to them new avenues of progress by conferring on them the right to contest seats with the Hindus.( Vide the Nehru-Report, p.52).It is, however, strange that in the same breath the com mittee agree that there is a possibility of the minorities being totally deprived of their rights.The Committee say :-'' After the resolution of the informal conference referred to above was passed it was pointed out to us that it would work great hardship on the lv1us1im minority who in all probability be able to elect no more than 30 or 40 Muslims from the Punjab and Bengal, and perhaps one or two from the U.P., and Behar, to the central legislature of 500 members, and that there was little chance of any of the other provinces with less than 7 per cent.of the population returning a single Muslim.The re sult, it was argued, would be that the MusEms, who form nearly one-fourth of the total population of British India, would have no more than one-tenth of representation in the central legislature.The same reasoning, it was urged, applied to the legislatures of the provinces where the Moslems • are in small minorities.We recognise the

Page 120

110 J f 01 c..t' of t hi :, nrguuu nt uu 1 i l i here• that.w • f •.) oll1- pc..ll t c.l hy force..of circ1t111Hl'1 tH'.and B har, wh r th y should 1 ct about 22 represental ivc s, they n1ay b • able to return only two or thrc� 111< rnhc rs.I do not here 1n an to discuss th rn rits or clen1 rits of the joint electorate sy�te1n.What I nn1 trying lo dis cover is whether the Mussalmnns, according to th reco1n mendations of the Nehru Co1nmitt e, have secured the proportion of r<: presentation they want d, or, at any rate, wheth r they have b t!n R8S\ll'cd of maintaining their present position.I inte11d to show on the basis of the Report itself that it is altog ·th r out of th qu stion for the Muslirns to xp ct nn incr ased repr s ntation.On the contrary, the MuslirnR cannot hope to rnaintain even their present proportion of r pres ntation.

Page 121

[ 111 ] To understand the matter clearly it must be borne in mind that, at present Muslim representation in the Legislative Assembly is 29 per cent., and in the future Parliament the Nehru Committee propose an aggregate number of 500 seats, of which, the Mussalmans would get 125 only on population basis, while in proportion to their present represent�tion they are entitled to 150 seats.According to the original demand of the Calcutta League, Muslims would have received one-third of the total seats, that is 166 seats.No,v I propose to show the proportion of representation the Muslims would command under the Nehru scheme.The Nehru-Report admits that the Muslim of Bengal and the Punjab would be able to return from thirty to forty members to the Central Legislature.Let us grant that the Muslims would be singularly fortunate in elect ing what the Report considers to be a maximum number of members for the Punjab and Bengal, i.e., forty.Let us also grant that the Muslims in Sindh, N.W.F.Pro vinces, and Baluchistan would be able to return the full proportion of members even in the face of Hindu opposi tion.The total population of these three provinces amounts to 61 ,26,000, of which only 5% are Hindus.The Muslim population of 58,22,000 will be entitled to eleven seats only.In the U.P., Behar, Assam, Madras, Central Province, and Bombay ( excluding Sindh), the Muslims are 71, 35, 15, 25, 5 and 12 lacs respectively.In Burma the actual figure of the present Muslim population is not before me, but judging from the census of 190 I when it was 3 lacs and 46 thousand we may reckon it at 5 lacs at ffl'C!>st.These figures make an aggregate of 1 crore and 68 lacs, on the strength of which the Muslims would be entitled to 33 seats; thus giving them a total number of 84.seats.Add to the above calculation- the Muslim

Page 122

[ 112 ·1 population of the Anda1nans, Coorg, Aj1neer-Marawar, The total is not likely to exce�d 1,75,00,000 giving an additional number of two seats only, which rneuns an aggregate of 86 seats.These figures eloquently speak for themselves.The Muslim League had demanded 166 seats.Under the present Government system, the Muslims are already in possession of 150 seats.And on population basis they are entitled to J 25 seats.Und,.:r the Nehru Scheme it is estimated that their share would be reduced to 86 seats only.The Mussalmans may wel1 ponder over these figures.It must be remembered that the Nehru-Report has been prepared by those Hindus who are straining every nerve to win over the Mussalmans.When their own estimate of our future position j� so hopeless, :t is useless to argue further.It is vain to contend that the Muslin1s in those provinces where they are in minority will be able to win more seats than they are entitled to by their number.The Nehru Committee at any rate do not agree to this view.It says :-· • There was little chance of any of the other provinces with less than 7 per cent.of the population, (meaning-Bombay, Madras, the C.P., Burma, etc.), returning a single l\lluslim • • to the Central Parliament.( Ibid.p.51 ).In the U.P.and Behar, the co1nmittee was of opinion that the Muslin1s n1ight succeed in securing one or two seats.Now does it stand to reas::>n that the Muslims in Bombay, Madras, Burma, and Central Provinces, having little chance of returning even one Muslim candidate from their respective constituencies by their cornbined voting strength in an open election, will under a system of reservation be able to wrest from the Hindus seats in addition to those reserved for them with the help of their residual votes? For, it is evident that in these provinces,

Page 123

l 113 1 reserved seats wi11 be allotted to the Muslims in those areas only, where they are most numerous, and the.greater part of their voting strength would thus be spent in returning candidates from those reserved constituen cies.In the remaining parts of the province there will be left at the most only ten to fifteen per cent.of the total Muslim votes available fo: participation in open election.No sensible man can believe that where the ,.Muslims with their full voting strength could not return even their legitimate proportion of candidates, they would be able with their residual votes to win seat5; from the Hindus who would number 93 ° ,� of the population.It is thus clear, that according to the ·ehru-Report p in those provinces where the Muslims happen to be in a minority, they will never be able to win seats more than their share on the basis of population.With regard to the Punjab and Bengal, the Report itself states that the Muslims wil1 be able to return 30 to 40 candidates only, whereas on a population basis they would be en titled to 74 candidates.In a word, even according to the Nehru-Report there can be no safeguarding of Muslim rights without reservation of seats ; and no poli tical school in the world would justify that eighty million of human beings should be deprived of their legitimate rights.Second Argument.The second argument in favour of reservation \)f seats is that in India the division of the population into major and minor communities has, unlike Europe, its basis in religious diversity, whi1e in the West the parties have their origin in political differences and are, therefore, subject to constant changes.In the Indian groups, changes are Jess frequent.It thus happens that when

Page 124

[ 114 J one group comes to power, its rule may continue in definitely, and there is the fear that it may during its long regime injure the interests of the rival community., For example, the party in power might show in the census a decrease in the strtngth of its rival, as is done in Europe, where a political group on capturing the Govern mental offices resorts to tactics such as recording a de crease in population against the vanquished group, or framing such electoral rules as might tend to benefit 1t at the expenses of the rival group.In order to protect the weaker parties against such tac6cs, it is necessary to have reservation of seats so as to remove mutual susp1c1on.For, it is obvious that so long as mutual dis trust prevails among the various groups, there can be no peace in 'India.Thus the system of reservation of seats is conducive, and not inimical to peace.When the Muslims apprehend that their interests are in danger, there is no reason why their seats should not be reserved even in the Punjab and Bengal.It is after all their legi timate share that they demand, and nothing more.To refuse to give them their right is to strengthen their sus p1c1on that there is something more behind, and that the Hindu compatriots do not mean well by them.It should be borne in mind in this connection that the Nehru-Report has admitted that under a jo:nt electorate system communities are liable to suffer in their interests, and it has cited the instance of England, where the con servatives with comparatively fewer votes defeated the Labour Party that had commanded a large number of votes.The same applies to the Muslims.They have only two provinces where they enjoy a bare majority.They would be confronted with a real danger if the party with fewer votes should come off victorious over the party with larger votes.

Page 125

[ 1 15 ] Third Argument.Of the eight major provinces in India, six are pre dominantly Hindu ill population, culture and custom.The Hindu preponderance is so formidable in these provinces that there is absolutely no chance for the Muslims ever to come into power.Only in two provinces, the Muslims command a majority.But the majority is not so large as to warrant a perpetual Muslim domination, and con tinual progress on the lines of their national traditions.The Mussalmans, therefore, very legitimately desire that they should have opportunities at least in these two pro vinces to progress according to their own traditions ; and the only way to this lies in the reservation of seats.No doubt, in the absence of a reservation of seats, it is possible for a community to gain more than its legi timate proportion of seats, but it is equally possible that it may not gain even its legitimate proportion.The danger is all the more real, when the margin of difference between the two communities is so small and the minority is so strong, as is the case in the Punjab and Bengal.The Nehru-Report itself has admitted the danger of the Punjab Muslims losing their majority position.It says: ·' The Muslims being in a minority in India as a whole fear that the majority may harass them, and to meet this difficulty they have made a novel suggestion-that they should at least dominate in some parts of India.We do not here criticise their demand.It may have some justification in the present comrnunal atmosphere but we do feel that it has little to do with the prem�ses we started from, unless indeed the best safeguard that one can have is to occupy a position of domination oneself.'' ( Nehru Report, p.28-29.) The Muslims contend that as they have only these two provinces where they are in a majority, they cannot afford to run the risk of their

Page 126

l ! J 6 J majority being converted into • • a strong minority just short of a majority." The Nehru-Report too makes a reference to this demand of the Muslims.It says:-•· In any event they,'' ( meaning-the Punjab Muslims), •• will capture enough seats to make the;m if not a clear majority at least a strong rninority just short of a majority." ( Ibid.p.35.) The Nehru Committee objects to the demand on the ground that it amounts to an admission that it is impos sible to safeguard the rights of the minorities without letting them occupy a position of domination, and that such a proposition is unjust on the very face of it.The committee, therefore, sum;marily dismisses the 1\,Iuslim de mand as an unjust one.So far as I can understand.the committee have put an interpretation on the Musl�m demand that at least the intelligent section of the fVIuslim public has never had this in its mind.I remember having heard, on the occasion of the last Unity Conference at Simla, one Hindu delegate (he was addressed as doctor, and if I am not mistaken, it was Dr.Nandlal, Bar-at-law) deprecating the Muslim proposal on the ground that it did not appeal to him that when a Hindu in the Central Province struck a Muslim, a Muslim in the Punjab should in retaliation strike a Hindu.No Muslim, I believe, had understood the demand in that way.In offences of a national character the whole of the community, to which the culprits belong.is treated as the offender, but it is neither reasonable nor justified to inflict indiscriminate punishment or to retaliate as has been suggested.But I ask the Hindus what would they answer to the Muslims, if they should make to them the following proposals at a time when the country's fate is going to be decided :- • • You aspire after the freedom of India and so do we.You are fully aware of the fact that you cannot do without us.You also know that from a fair]y long time our

Page 127

[ 117 ] mutual relations are strained.We have a grievance that in every branch of life our rights have been disregarded.Why not try this remedy? India is a large sub-continent with such a diversity in tongues that in some cases the difference is much wider than between those of two in dependent states of Europe.!In certain provinces the Hindus happen to preponderate, and in some the Mus lims.Let us agree that in a province where a certain community preponderates it should be allowed to have the larger share in the Government.That would restore mutual confidence.Each community would feel inclined to reciprocate the trust placed on it by the other.And as a consequence all would peacefully co-operate towards promoting the weal of the country.'' There is nothing unjust or unwise in such a sugges tion.Why should it at all be interpreted to imply a threat that if a Hindu in the C.P.were to beat a Muslim in his province, a brother Hindu shall suffer punishment in the Punjab or vice versa, and justice would thus be maintained-through fear of retaliation.The demand has, in fact, its origin in the suspicion in the Muslim mind that the Hindus attempt to keep the Muslims under sub jection everywhere, and in places where he cannot reason ably do so, to invent such device as would afford him opportunities to come into power.This naturally sets the Muslim athinking that when India is going to be parti tioned into provinces, why are the Muslim� denied the opportunity for untrammelled progress :n those provinces, where they form the majority of the population.He sus pects some ulterior motive behind this denial, and whether his suspicion is right or wrong, nonetheless it stands in the way of mutual understanding.�t cannot be urged in this connection that the avenues of progress for minor communities have been left open

Page 128

[ 118 ] not in the Muslim provinces alone, but that in every province there is scope for any minority to rule the the majority.In reply I may well ask whether there is any major province, except the Punjab and Bengal, where it may be reasonably expected that the majority and the minority communities would alternately come into power.If there is none, there is hardly a point of analogy.In the Punjab and Bengal, we have a minority that could manage through its superiority in wealth, education, and organisation, if not to monopolise the Government for good, at least to change places frequently with the major.ity.But in Madras and Bombay, the C.P., the U.P., Behar and Bur�a, the Muslim minority ( which nowhere exceeds 15 % of the population } is foredoomed to remain a perpetual minority with no effective voice in the Gov ernment of the country.Equity, therefore, demands thc1t seats should be reserved for the Muslims in the Punjab and Bengal, and then, they should be exhorted to trust the Hindus in other provinces in the same ,vay as they did trust them in these provinces.and to disabuse their minds of all suspicions.The Nehru-Report has laid particular stress upon this point.It says :-' • We cannot have one community do mineering over another.We may not be able to pre vent this entirely but the object we should aim at is not to give dominion to one over another but to prevent the harassment and exploitation o-f any individual or group by another." ( Ibid.p.29.) But the question is,-have the committee precluded the chances of class domina tion? In Madras, Behar, and other places, the committee itself feel:, apprehension that the Hindu domination will b _ e of a permanent nature, as the fv1uslims in those pro, :.1 n 1 ces.are a ••negligible'' minority.Th� Report says :- t will be h • • • seen t at by making this concession in I -4

Page 129

[ 119 ] favour of Muslim minoritie� we are not introduc{ng the anomalies arising out of reservation for majorities../\ minority must remain a minority whether any seats are reserved for it or not and cannot dominate the majority.·· ( Vide p.52.) From the above quotation 1t 1s clear that the Nehru Committee think that in Bombay, Madras, the U.P., etc., the Mussalmans shall continue in a minority posi tion for all times to come, which in other words means that in those provinces the Hindus shall always hold the reins of Government.This is exactly what is meant by • • one- community domineer�ng over another.•· And when such domination of one community over another shall prevail in some of the provinces without causing any harm whatsoever, what reason is there that a similar situation should not be created in the Punjab and Bengal? If the permanent preponderance of representation of a particular community is bad, it is so everywhere ; but if it can be tolerated in Bombay and Madras, it can cer tainly be tolerated in the Punjab and Bengal as well.It should be noted here that the Nehru Committee has itself been so much obsessed with communal senti ments that it has viewed the Muslim demands through the same communal goggles, and has in consequence committed the blunder of reading in the Muslim demand an ambition to rule in the Punjab and Bengal to the com plete exclusion of the non-Muslims.That is not the Muslim demand at all.All that they demand is that whereas in the predominantly Hindu provinces, Hindu representation on the legislative bodies would necessarily remain a permanent majority, similarly the MusEm repre sentation in the Punjab and Bengal, where they form the majority of the population, should exceed that of the other communities ; and further as the Muslim majority

Page 130

[ J 20 j 1n these provinces is not so large as to be secure of its position without special safeguards, it should be so provided by law that this right of the Mussalmans might not be infringed by any other community by any means, fair or foul.It is clear that here is no question of domination at all.Such a question could, no doubt, arise if the Muslims had demanded that the Hindus should be given the ex clusive rule in the predominantly Hindu provinces, and the Muslims in the predominantly Muslim provinces.On the contrary, the Muslims demand, that they should have a majority of representation in the predominantly Muslim provinces in the same way as the Hindus in the predomin antly Hindu provinces.A majority of representation does not necessarily signify that the reins of Government should also remain exclusively in their hands.We may see that even now under the system of separate elector ates which is so much traduced on all sides, there is no exclusively Muslim party in the Punjab Council.There is a Zemindar's party, which includes both Muslim and Hindu members.There are the Khilafatists who are hand and glove with the Swarajists.Thus in the Punjab and Bengal, it is easy for the Hindus to have a substan tial share in the Government of the country by winning to their side only 6 per cent.of the Muslims.It cannot be held that the Muslims and the Hindus will never co operate so long as representation continues on the lines of religious division.For, religion is not synonymous ' with politics.Religion is related to civilisation and cul ture.People of different religions do co-operate with one another in political matters.And if such co-operation is possible under the present circum::;tances in spite of acute differences, there is no reason why it should not be pos- sible in future.It is foolish to think that all Muslims would agree to one political creed ; and when such an

Page 131

[ 121 ) agreement is not possible among them, they cannot evidently form a purely Muslim party to hold sway either in the Punjab, or in Bengal; it will of necessity have to include Hindu elements in its rank.The question of domination, therefore, does not arise at all.This fear of the Nehru Committee is thus a figment of their own imagination caused by their strong communal bias.They have attributed to the Muslims what was by no means signified by their demand.The fact is that there is a possibility,-nay, a certainly of communal domination in the predominantly Hindu provinces, where the Hindu majority is so large that, even if divided into sections, it would still succeed in setting up a Hindu class-rule.I admit that there are similar chances for the i\luslims in the N.W.F.Provinces, Sindh, etc.But these pro vinces are so small that they are not likely to influence the Indian situation to any considerable degree.Four th Argument.There are other cogent reasons for laying so much stress upon a �ajority representation for the 1\1uslims in the Punjab and Bengal Councils.I have already proved that in the Punjab and Bengal, the Muslims with a bare majority cannot manage to rule the country to the com plete exclusion of other communities, even if they are granted a reservation of seats.In both of these pro vinces, the parties in power are sure to include Hindu elements.In spite of thi�.there is no doubt that what ever party might be in power, the Government in these provinces, shall have a considerable proportion of the Muslims in its personnel, which no future Government of those provinces under any circumstances would be able to i gn ore.Having elucidated this point, let us for

Page 132

[ 122 ] a moment leave the communal view-point and consider whether or not it is good for the country that the Muslims should have no voice in its administration, or that their share should be next to nothing.Every student of poli tics is well aware that a good legal code a.lone is not enough to run a good government ; a proper appl:ca tion of the same is equally necessary.It is clear that the administration of India will be divided into Provincial Governments, and while it will be necessary for the Cen tral Government to have an Executive Council, it will be similarly necessary for the Provincial Governments to confer occasionally in a Council on matters relating to general administration.According to the Nehru Com mittee it is quite possible that, in the Punjab and Bengal, all the members of Government may at one time be Hindu, and at another time Mussalmans.Now the ques tion will arise how will the Muslim view-point be repre �ented in the deliberations of the Executive Council during the Hindu regime? Of course, no body can expect that small provinces like Sindh, and the N.W.F.Provinces will be able to fulfil this need.Thus, even from a broad national view-point it is imperative to ensure the inclusion of Muslim elements in the Governments of the Punjab and Bengal by means of legi.$lation, and the only way to do so is to grant reservation of seats for the Moslems.Fifth Argument.The Nehru Committee also agree that different com munities have distinct cultures of their own, and are desirous of national development according to their re spective traditions, and that in spite of living together in the same land under the same political organisation, the divergence in culture may continue to exist.The

Page 133

[ 123 ] Report says : -• � The only methods of giving a feeling of security are safeguards and guarantees and the grant, as far as possible.of cultural autonomy." ( Vide p.28.) Thus, the committee admit that different communities have different cultures, and it is not unreasonable fer them to demand guarantees for their preservation.Ac cordingly the Mussalmans, anxious as they are to restore an atmosphere of mutual confidence, demand that in addition to having a hand in the administration of the country and a proportionate representation in the pro vinces, they should have opportunities for cultural pro gres� in the Punjab and Bengal in complete accord with their past traditions.This is hardly an occasion to dis cuss how a community, when making progress, lays the foundation of its culture on a few fundamental principles, and in its tradition and development it assumes a line different from other communities.It gradually de velops into a distinct culture of its own, and guards it more jealously than even its liberty.Nations seldom fight so violently for their political interests as they do in defence of their cultures.The latter is of the nature of an abstraction, and therefore admits of no specific definition, although its existence and importance cannot be denied.Every nation, because of its religious beLefs or its environments, develops a particular mentality, which chalks out the lines of its progress.Its philosophy, civilisation, intellectual and economic development,-all move within the same orbit, and culminate in a corporate national self-expression.In other words, metaphorically speaking it is a sort of mental soil, in which the different branches of knowledge like plants of all kinds, manifest their distinctive colours.Just as in different soils, d"ffer ent fruits and flowers manifest distinctive features of their own, so peoples, living under different cultural influences, develop distinctive features and characteristics of their

Page 134

[ 124 J own.Nations develop such a natural affinity with their own cultures that, if dissociated from them.they wither away and die like plants of a particular country, trans planted in a foreign soil.Science is uniform all the world over.But the Englishmen, the Germans.the French and the Russians,-all of them devote themselves to this in their own particular ways.The Indians' chief complaint against the Engli�hmen is that the latter have westernised their Eastern culture and have rendered them degenerated.In short, next to religion, culture is the dearest thing to a nation.It is to the nation as the breath of its life.A community, without a distinct cul ture of its own, is a life-less group doomed to merge sooner or later with other communities, for its existence brings no benefit to the world.Just as different scientists, working in different laboratories, have been contributing in their respective ways to the world of science, so differ ent peoples, in their distinctive cultural spheres have been experimenting in the philosophy of life, and are thus not only serving humanity at large, but also, by working for the realisation of their own view�points, have been developing their particular cultures.Communities which do not contribute towards augmenting this com mo� treasure-house are morally dead, and bound to die physically sooner or later.It is for the protection of their culture that the Hindus are to-day clamouring for Self� Government.'' Good government is no substitute for Self-Government " is an embodiment of the same truth.A good government can indeed make a people increase in wealth and comfort.but it cannot benefit their culture.On the contrary, it would destroy it.Cultural develop ment is possible only when the Government is run by the people themselves.Just as our Hindu brethren are inspired by their study of past history with a desire to have opportunities to develop their distinctive culture in I

Page 135

,..[ 125 ] celation '\vith modern conditions and thus make their con tribution to the world civilisation, so they may understand that the hearts of f\1uslims have been pulsating precisely in the same manner.They too are heirs to glorious traditions, and are the descendents of a race of men, ,,�hose enterprise knew no bounds.They too have their aspirations.They too are not strangers.They are lndians and yield to none in their patriotic sentiments.But it can hardly be gainsaid that where the Hindu ele ment ,-vould preponderate, the Government would develop on lines of Hindu culture and philosophy.It is.there fore, that the �luslims demand for opportunities in the predominantly Muslim provinces to make progress on their o,-vn cultural lines.I do not, here, mean to say that they would enforce the Islamic law in those pro vinces.Such enforcement of the laws of a particular religion ,vould not be proper, either for the Hindus or for the 1\1uslims under a joint system of Government.But apart from Government, there are many spheres of life other than religion wherein a man should like to develop according to the philosophy of life peculi3.r to his people, and to sow the seeds and rear the plants of national development suitable to the particular scheme of worldly progress.A legitimate desire, therefore, prompts the iv1uslims' demand for similar opportunities :n two of the bigger provinces to make progress for some time to come, in accordance with their special traditions without interference and interruption.ls this demand an unreasonable one? Is the desire unnatural? Is it anta gonistic to feelings of patriotism? No, not in the least.Free cultural development is not inimical to common na tional interests.so India with a free dominion Govern ment, while serving as a vast laboratory for the cultural development of Asia, is not likely to cause any injury to England.It is regrettable, therefore, that the Nehru-

Page 136

[ 126 ] Report, whatever its merits may be, has absolutely failed to satisfy this desire of the Muslim co,nmunity.Even if it leaves the door open for the Muslims to dominate some day in the Punjab and Bengal, yet it does not afford them an opportunity to contribute to the treasures of human civilisation by enabling them to develop for some ti1ne iu accordance with their past traditions.The cul ture of a people cannot yield its fruit, unless it is given an uninterrupted series of opportunities for self-expres sion.But under the Nehru Scheme, there is the pos sibility of the Muslim element, being totally eliminated from the Government in the Punjab and Bengal./ Sixth Argument.For full national development a people must be equipped with experience in all lines of work.This serves as an additional argument for reserving Muslim representation in the Punjab and Bengal on the basis of population.Evidently, in predominantly Hindu pro vinces the Muslims cannot be expected to receive train ing in higher statecraft.There are only two provinces where the Muslims may get such experience, viz., the Punjab and Bengal, where the Muslims hold a majority position.And if in these two provinces also, the Gov ernment be purely Hindu, or comprise of a poor Muslim element, then the opportunities for training in higher state-craft would be practically non-existent for the Mus lims, and in consequence they are bound to suffer con..siderably.The N.W.F.Provinces, Baluchistan and Sindh can hardly serve as training grounds, for the ob vious reason, that Baluchistan with a population of 4,25,000 only has at best the status of a municipal cor poration, and the other two provinces are, both from

Page 137

[ 127 ] the view-point of population and of economic capacity, too poor to afford a Government machinery on as large a scale as the major provinces.For the all-round train ing of their talents, it is essential to afford the Mussal mans uninterrupted opportunities for training for such time as they do not make up the deficiency.That could be done only by reserving their places in the Punjab and Bengal.Otherwise, the Muslims will never be able to shoulder the responsibilities of government, and would in consequence, instead of adding to the country's strength, lie like a dead weight upon it.NEHRU COMMITTEE'S OBJECTIONS.Having discussed at length the grounds for securing to the MusEms their position in the Punjab and Bengal in exactly the same manner, as would the pos;tion of the Hindus be secure in predominantly Hindu provinces, I now proceed to deal with the objections raised by the Nehru Committee against the demand for safeguarding the Muslim interests.The Nehru Committee holds that, (i) safeguarding the rights of, and Reservation of Seats for majorities lead to an intensification of communal misunderstanding, because the election is held upon the artificial basis of ·1ifference of religion ; (ii) Reservation for majorities with joint electorates r�tards inter-communal unity, because it makes the majori ties independent of the votes of the minorities, and there fore indifferent to them ; (iii) Responsible Government means a Government in which the Executive is responsible to the Legislature.and the Legislature to the electorates.If the members of the Executive, ·.vho have the majority at their back, come to power by virtue of special safeguards, and not

Page 138

[ J 28 ] by virtue of open election by the electors, then the Gov, ernment would be neither Responsible, nor Representa tive.(iv) In the Punjab and Bengal, the Muslim population is so distributed that the community does not require any Reservation of Seats.It can easily capture seats equal to or even exceeding its nuμierical proportion.(v) I add to these another argument, advanced by a worthy member of the Punjab Legislative Council, that the results of the elections to the district boards, where the Muslims, notwithstanding a minority of voters, cap tured more seats.encourage one to believe that a free contest would be more advantageous to the Mussalmans than separate election.(i) As regards the first objection, I fail to understand how, in case of Reservation of Seats for particular com munities, the election can be held on the basis of reli g:ous differences.For, under such a system it will have already been decided that candidates.belonging to a particular community only, shall be entitled to stand for a particular constituency.In a Muslim constituency it is not po$sible for a Muslim candidate to ask for votef on the mere ground of his being a Mussalman.Such a question may, of course.arise in non-reserved constitu encies, where it is quite possible that a particular seat may be contested by Hindu and Muslim candidates, the former asking for votes on the mere ground of his being a Hindu, and the latter on his being a Muslim.But where the law has already decided, that· a particular con stituency shall be reserved for a particular community, this question cannot arise.The question, that could arise in such a constituency, may be of a sectarian nature such as.whether the candidate is a Shia, or a Sunni ; or reaarding the political view-point of each contestant.

Page 139

[ 129 ] And in cases of reserved constituencies, the importance would centre around the question of political views.And if the method of election be that of joint elector ates with Reser�_ation of Seats, it is all the more certain, that no other consideration save that of political creed, would be raised inasmuch as the different Muslim candidates would have to capture Hindu votes.They would, therefore, be compelled to eliminate the question of religion altogether, lest their rivals should get the better of them with the votes of non-Muslim com munities.The fact should also be remembered that generally in elections there are more than one candidate standing for a constituency.He has to contest the seat some time with more than one rival.To say, therefore, that every candidate would urge his claim as a Muslim, and consequently, there would be an increase of communal feeling, is absurd.For all the contestants cannot, claim for votes on one and the same ground of their being Muslims.They shall have to urge other points, and these would be mainly political.And if it is here argued that possibly none of the Muslim candidates in a parti cular constituency may be in agreement with the Hindu view-point, how can we, then, reasonably expect a Hindu candidate from such constituency to obtain Muslim votes by fair means? I say ' fair �eans,' because in electi�n affairs voting is done secretly, and so it is quite possible to secure Muslim votes by unfair means.Voters may be persuaded to behave traitorously to their community with..out the least fear of being exposed.A candidate, who is fraudulently returned, does not represent the country ; at best 1 he represents his sordid c r inbitions.(ii) As regards the second objection, it can be argued that Reservation of Seats will rather remove mutual dis-

Page 140

[ 130 ] trust, and restore normal relations between the com• munities as under this arrangement, the constant fear ' ' of injury to mutual interest will disappear.Further, it is no advantage to any individual candi date, A or B, that the Government has reserved a parti cular seat for the Muslim Community ; because such re servation is for the community as a whole, and not for any particular candidate, who must care for every single vote, and in order to beat his rival, must canvass every member.Therefore, the contention, that the majority would no longer care for a minority falls to the ground.It is the candidate, and not the community, who seeks the votes, and therefore, he must in any case remain dependent on the votes of individual electors.Moreover, there will be his supporters, who for his sake, shall have to care for the vote of every elector, and thus indirectly the whole of the majority party shall have to depend, for the success of their candidates, on the votes of the minority.Reservation of Seats, therefore, does not pre vent, rather it leads to the removal of communal distrust.(iii) In its third objection the Committee argue that Reservation of Seats imposes restrictions on the electors ; and the majority rules the country not as a result of free and open election, but by virtue of the restrictions im posed on the electors by law.Hence, such a system is ·' a negation of representative government,'' and so de feats its end.In my opinion this is a very important political ques tion.If the conclusion arrived at by the Committee ·is right, the whole controversy comes to an end.But, 1 1 think the committee have made a mistake in its judgment.For, the question to be considered is, whether it could be possible for any Muslim to represent a particular view- ---· point which a Hindu could possibly do.If not, then it

Page 141

• - [ 131 ] is evident that the electorate is opposed to that particular view-point.Under the circumstances, how would the presence of a Hindu candidate increase the weight of the representation, unless it be by resort to unfair means; and unfair tactics are in any case unfair.Another answer to the argument is that, under some circumstances, the rights of the electorate are bound to be circumscribed.And the Nehru Committee also has done so, when, for example, it has proposed an age limit of 21 years for a voter.This is a restriction im posed upon individual liberty, for there are men who attain discretion before they are 21.Why should then such a restriction be upon the electors? Similarly, the condition of nationality has been passed over by the Committee.!It prevails in all other civilised countries, and so it will surely be imposed upon Indians as well.Now, is it not possible that the electorate might wish to elect a non-Indian, who may be a well-wisher of the country, and who may also be willing to be natu1- alised as an Indian but prevented for the time being by the technicalities of law? In short, the Nehru Committee, even in its recom mendations, has already restricted the rights of the elec torates ; and when the details of the constitution will be worked out, the rights are sure to be restricted still further.Restrictions, therefore, are not '' a negation of the principle of representative government.'' It is only unfair restriction that is opposed to Juch principle.And when the majority community of a province demands such restrictions as a matter of right, and such restric tions do not infringe the rights of any other community, they can by no means be considered unjust ; and hence, they cannot be deemed to negate the pr�nciple of repre sentative government.All that we can say is that, in--

Page 142

[ 132 ] stead of the whole country co-operating in electing its representatives, its different parts will elect their own representatives.Representation does exist though in � different form.And in fact, all civilised countries differ from one another in their forms of representation.(iv) The last, and I should say, the most powe:rful argument in the opinion of the opponents is, that with reservation of seats the Muslims would get seats only in proportion to their population, but without such reserva tion, there would be chances for them to secure more, and there is no reason why they should refuse the chance of an increased representation.Any man with a head on his shoulders would see through this argument, and agree that it is playing with the sentiments of the people, and I am really surpri�ed to see that the Nehru Com• mittee did try to exploit the sentiments of the Muslims, without realising that it might produce result, quite con trary to what it expected.The Nehru Committee is in fact so much enamoured of this argument, that it has stressed it on several occa sions.It says :-'' We have seen that this superiority has not helped the Hindus of Bengal at the District Board elections and we are sure that the result of Council elections will be even more strikingly in favour of the Moslems." ( Nehru-Report, p.48.) Again:-'' Looking at it purely from the Hindu point of view, however, we can well imagine that a reservation of seats for the Muslim majorities in the Punjab and Bengal, may actually benefit the Hindus, and may be the Sikhs also, more than no reserva tion.The facts and figures we have stated demonstrate that the Muslim position in the Punjab and Bengal is so strong that in all likelihood they will gain in a joint electorate with no reservation more seats than their popti...(

Page 143

[ 133 ] lation warrants.Thus the Hindu and the.Sikh minori t:es may find their representation even reduced below their population ratio." ( Ibid, p.49.) Further on, about Bengal it writes:-•• The Hindu minority, although it is a very big minority, is highly l�kely to suffer in numbers in an open general election without reservation.(Ibid, p.47.) Clearly the Nehru-Report emphasises the point that without Reservation of Seats, the Muslims would be in a specially strong position in the Punjab, and Bengal.When a report prepared by the Hindus proceeds to lay so much stress on the advantages to be derived by the Muslims in the absence of reservation, it naturally arouses..misgivings, more specially, when the same report admits elsewhere ( on p.51 } that without such reservation the Muslims, in the Punjab and Bengal, "would, in all prob ability, be able to elect no more than 30 or 40 '· repre sentatives to the Central Parliament, instead of 72 their proper number according to population.The cat is now out of the bag, and no mask can hide the grim reality.I would briefly refer here to another important point that, in the opinion of the Nehru Committee as ev:denced from the above quotations, elections would continue to be fought on communal lines even under a joint elector ate system.For, if, the people's mentality was going to be changed after the introduction of this system, how would it then be possible for the Muslims to command a majority of seats in the Punjab and Bengal? In my opinion, the distribution of population shall have no special enect upon the elections.According to the Nehru-Report, the Punjab is divided into three divi sions, viz., ( 1) those areas in which the Muslims pre ponderate ; (2) those in which both the Hindus and the Muslims are equally strong ; and (3) those in which the

Page 144

134 J I Jindu8 pn:ponderatc.It has f urth<:r proceeded to $how.,+ t.hi1t, aa the area, where the J-fjndu elernent preponder-- ateB, i,; srnallcr than the area, where the Muslirns pre pon<lcrc1te, the Mu8lims aha1l be in a position of advant-- age over the Sjkhs and the Hindus.It holds the &ame vjcw with r<!gard to the position in Bengal.In my opin:on it is a mistaken view.�fhe Nehru Committee seems to have; assumed that a district will form a constituency, while as a matter of fact a constituency is much smaller in area.According to the Nehru Committee every 1,00,000 inhabitants will select one representative.Ac cordingly, a population of 2,06,50,000 in the Punjab would elect 7 ½ candidates from each district, the total number of districts being 28.In many of these divisions the 1-lindu or the Sikh population would certainly not be so insignificant as it would, otherwise, be in the whole district.The matter will be clearer when seen in the light of the fact that a minority differing with its sister communities, as a rule, settles in towns and cities, instead of in rural areas.The Hindus general1y do so.In all those tracts, where Muslims are in majority, the Hindu population lives in towns and not in villages and prefers to live together.And euch of them, also, as happen to go to the villages for business, invariably have their property in towns, and do not sever connections with the cities.For illustration, one has not to go far.In the Punjab the Muslim popuiat:on amounts to 55% of the total, while the Hindu and the Sikh population is on1y 43 %.But in the city elections, where eight Hindu and Sikh members are electer:l, only six Muslims are returned, i.e., Hindu and Sikh representation from the municipa}i..ties amounts to 57%, and that of the Muslim only 43 �lo.No doubt the introduction of adult sufferage would dimin-- ish the non-Muslim proportion, and increase the Muslim ,.proportion, but it cannot be gainsaid that from the pre--

Page 145

[ 135 l sent relative proportion, it is clear that 1--lindus and the Sikhs are more thickly {Jopulated in towns.On the in troduction of adult suffrage this tendency would grow stronger, and even in predominantly Muslim areas, the Hindus who will live in towns, shall exercise their right of vote more largely than the Muslims, and thus secure their share even in places where they happen to hold a minority position.The Nehru scheme is thus to all in tents and purposes at best but make-belief; for most surely the powerful factor, namely, that of Hindu-Sikh intellectual and economic superiority would assert itself anyhow.The Nehru Committee has fortunately taken cognizance of this fact.DISTRICT BOARD ELECTIONS.(v) The only questio.a that now remains to be con sidered is that of elections to the District Boards in the Punjab and Bengal.It has been stated that in these elections, the Muslims in spite of their economic back wardness, succeeded in capturing more seats than they were entitled to, and the inference has been drawn that with a good organisation which it is hoped they would possess shortly, the co1nmunity would, by dint of its numerical strength, be able to secure the lion's share.As this di�cussion ha8 already occupied longer space than expected, I would cut short by taking up the ques tions of the Punjab and the Bengal District Board elec tions under the same head.First, as regards Bengal, the Nehru-Report has taken up the question in detail, and it has sought to establish that the Muslims in some districts captured more seats than their numbers entitled them to.But the point at issue is the gross proportion of seats captured by the Muslims in the Dis trict Boards of the province as a whole.Of the total

Page 146

[ 136 J 458 mernbers, the Muslims in proportion to their popula tion are entitled to 247 seats and the Hindus to 211.The results.however, show that the Muslims could capture only 209 seats while the Hindus secured the remaining 249.In other words the Muslim population, which was entitled to a percentage of 54, gained only 45 seats, and the Hindu population with a percentage of 46 only cap tured 55 per cent.of the seats.If that is the prospect held out to the Mussalmans by the Nehru Committee, it is hardly an occasion for rejoicing.I admit that the Muslim position in the Punjab ap parently seems to be rather strong.The Punjab District Board statistics published by Mr.Afzal Haq Chowdhury, M.L.C., would startle and convince many of the ability of the Muslims to hold their own in spite of educational and economic backwardness.The figures show that in proportion to their population, the Muslims \.Vere entitled to 443 seats, and in proportion to the:r voting strength to 363, but they were able to capture 408 seats, that is in proportion to their voting strength they wrested 4S seats more than their due.The Sikhs, on population basis, were entitled to 186¾ seats, and on franchise basis to ) 84¾; but they actually won 185 seats, that is slightly in excess over their right.The Hindus in proportion to their numerical strength ,1/ere entitled to 275¼ seats and on franchise basis 268, but they could capture 221 seats only.It has been accordingly inferred that the Musli1n population is strong enough to secure representation over and above its right.A WRONG STUDY OF FIGURES.In spite of the above figures, I am not prepared to....� endorse the conclusion derived from them.I cannot help

Page 147

[ 137 ] putting a straight question.Would any sensible man ever draw general conclusions from the results of a parti cular occasion? For such conclusions, what is necessary is to have figures of at least ten elections, and to find out from their average, what proportion of seat$ has been captured by different communities.If the disparity in figures is to be found only in the near past both in the Punjab and Bengal, then we shall be forced to ascribe it not to the adriotness of the Muslims, but to the wave of rabid communalism that reached its climax during the past four or five years.The riots in Multan, Calcutta, Barisal, and Lahore and the sufferings of the Moplas were shock$ powerful enough to make any Mussalm:1n·s blood boil within him.But this temporary excitement of feelings can hardly be considered a permanent feature.Do the protagonists of non-reservation of seats mean to assure us that they would continue exciting communal passions, and fomenting communal warfare? If not, and their love for the motherland should prompt them to say no, then I ask whether the result of a temporary excite ment in the two communities can justly be regarded as the standard of future elections.There is no doubt that a community, which suffers an irreparable loss, becomes indifferent for the time being to other influences, and sets to work free from every kind of restraints, their numbers only adding to its strength.Since the Muslims have been victims of grave inequities in the past, their feelings were excited more than those of any other com munity.To judge therefore of their future activities by their present efforts is simply unwise.The validity of the figures of the recent elections would be proved only when the average of at least ten consecutive elect:ons approximates the present figures.To a statistician, the inference d:rawn from the comparison of figures is valid only ( 1) when r,ircumstances of an extraordinary nature

Page 148

[ 138 ] are absent, (2) the statistics extend over a fairly long period, and (3) when the.figures do not go to indicate the underlying presence of any adverse movement or a probability thereof, that is, when it is proved that in the figures for the successive years, there is no gradually developing factor militating against our conclusions.But in the figures noted both by the worthy member and the Nehru Committee not one of the three conditions has ' been fulfilled.It has neither been proved that special circumstances did not exist at the time of the elections.( on the contray I have proved that special circumstances did exist.), nor have the statistics of several elections been quoted, nor again has it been proved that from the figures of the past elections it does not appear that any such factors have been developing as threaten the progress of the Mussalmans.It is consequently foolish to dra"v any conclusion from these figures.The value of such figures depends on their average.Without such average they are meaningless ; while to depend on the figures of one single election is positively mischievous.Even the weakest army may by chance defeat a most formid able host, but such chances are rare indeed.HI DU INDIFFERENCE TO DISTRICT BOARD ELECTIONS.Even if statistics showed the continued success of the Mussalmans as against other communities in the District Board elections of the past few years, still it would be erroneous to conclude that the Muslims would prevail against the Hindus in the Council elections also.There is nothing common between the Councils and the District Boards.A seat on the latter is now hardly a matter for pride or prestige.The District Boards are practically unconcerned ,-vith the trade of the country.The Hindus, I mean the trading community, therefore,

Page 149

are not particularly interested in then1: for they take part in something.only ,vhen their interest is at stake.If they take part in District Board elections it is invari ably for the sake of some fr:ends.The Hindus are interested in the l\lunicipalities and also in the Councils, because the l\ lunicipalities are concerned with trade and so are the Councils.There is also the element of prestige.The Hindus see in these bodies the opportunity for the fulfilment of their hopes, viz., that of reviving Hindu cul ture."y..l e cannot, therefore, safely draw our conclusions from the results of the District Board elections.There is before us the parallel of the British Parliament, and Local Boroughs.We may see that the country may at one time send one party to power in the parliament, and the opposite party to boroughs and municipal com mittees.Those conversant with politics are therefore agreed, that we cannot judge the results of the one from the figures of the other.I fail to understand how the Nehru Committee and our Punjab Councillors have as sumed the two bodies to be similar in character and have thus judged the result of the one from the figures of the other.But apart from the arguments of reason and the con siderations of politics, if we study the figures themselves.it looks clear that the result of these elections is due more to the indifference of the Hindus than to the clerver ness of the Muslims.The figures show that all the extra seats, the Mussalmans ,¥on, were wrested from the Hindus and not from the Sikhs.If their adroitness had been the real factor in the game they could have wrested seats from the Sikhs also.But from the figures it is clear that only the Hindus lost as many as 46} seats.As against their loss the increase of the Muslims and the Sikhs was 46 and ¼ respectively.Clearly both the Muslims and the Sikhs have encroached upon the rights of the Hindus

Page 150

[ 140 ] alone.Had there been the question of the domination of a majority over a minority, then the Sikhs would have been the larger sufferers being the smaller minority com munity,-almost half as much as the Hindus.The figures therefore do in no way prove that the Muslims' gain was due to their strength.On the contrary, they prove that the Hindu community is not interested enough in the District Boards.The facts do not therefore warrant the conclusion that in the elections to the councils also, the Hindus would suffer a defeat at the hands of their Mu slim rivals.The fact must not be lost sight of that it is the land holders who are most interested in the District Boards.The traders no doubt purchase landed property, but they dislike turning agriculturists, and do not take such in terest in the District Boards as they otherwise might be expected to ci:::>.As for the Hindu agriculturist, he is as much oppressed by the Baniya as the Mussalman.In government offices, the Hindu agriculturists o-f Rohtak, Garbaon, Hissar, Kamal and Ambala, will not be found in appreciable number,-in fact they are fewer than the Muslim employees.That is why they co-operate with the Muslims in getting rid of the domination of the Baniya Elections to District Boards are mostly fought out by the members of this class and not by the Sahuk,ara and the Hindu trading classes.Moreover, it must be remembered that neither the central political bodies take active part in elections to District Boards, nor do the wealthy men from cities con test seats in those elections.In the elections to the Councils, on the other hand, central political bodies take active part, and rich men from the cities join the con test.The two elections have therefore little resem- , , blance to each other.

Page 151

ll [ 141 ] In a word in the first place the figures quoted are not such as would justify any scientific conclusion.Secondly, even assuming the correctnesa of the inference, which has been drawn from the figures, we cannot, with any show of reason, judge the situation in the Council election from the conditions in the District Board elections for the simple reason of want of any analogous fea tures between the two, which alone would justify such com-.panson.But let us for a moment admit, for the sake of argu ment, all the conclusions, which, those who produce the figures, want to infer from them.The question then arises :-Do these figures indicate that the results would always continue favourable to the Mussalmans, or simply that there are chances fo1 the Muslims to come off best? I am sure no reasonable man would conclude from these figures that Muslims would always wrest more seats than they are entitled to.Because there are ah\--ays the same opportunities for the Hindus to organise themselves as for the Mussalmans.Again, when we take into considera t: on the fact that Hindus are in a minority, and minori ties as a rule are more zealous than majorities, and further that in the Punjab the Muslims are confronted with two minorities each conscious of its minority posi tion and consequently very active, and still further the dangerous reality that the two minorities being combined together would approach the numerical position of the Muslims, the risk increases and we cannot but admit that if the Muslims would secure a position of supremacy at one time, these rival communities would most certainly hold sway at another.rfhese eventualities preclude the possibility of the Muslims enjoying the same opportunity for progress that the Hindus shall enjoy in other pro vinces.As a result the Muslims would, in a few years, have perforce to submit absolutely to the influence of the

Page 152

[ 142 ] Hindu culture, and lose their own national identity and existence.For the development of culture, a powerful government is not so essential as its continued existence.And this is possible only with a reservation of seats.The Hindu element, under such conditions, would form a part of almost every government, but in my opinion that would help to prevent the development of a communal government, and to bring about inter-communal unity.

Page 153

CH APTER X.Muslim Representation in the Central Government.DETAILED STUDY-( Continued.) The fourth demand of the Muslims is for one-third of the seats in the Central Government ; or at least for a guarantee of their present position.As already stated, this demand also has been rejected by the Nehru Com mittee, which says:-" We have given our best consi deration to the matter but we regret we are unable to recommend reservation of one-third of the total number of seats for Muslims in the central legislature.·' ( Nehru Report, p.54.) The committee proposes instead that in provinces where the Muslims are in a minority, their rights shall be reserved and in the Punjab and Bengal, there shall be an open contest.I have already explained that according to the ad mission of the Nehru Committee itself, in provinces where the Muslims are in a minority, far from being able to secure more than their proper share, they would hardly be able to win seats even in proportion to their population.It is, therefore, sheer madness to expect that, as a result of the arrangement recommended by the Nehru Committee, the Muslims will be able to win seats in excess of their population ratio.The arrange ment will, in fact, prove a severe blow to the Muslims.It is, therefore, indispensable that at least a third of the seats in the Central Legislature should be reserved for them.The arguments put forward by the Nehru Committee against such Reservation of Seats are as follows :-

Page 154

[ 144 ] ( 1) To grant to any community representation in ex cess of their population ratio is contrary to the principle of Representative Government.(2) If the Muslims are granted representation in excess of their population ratio, it would be an injustice to the other minority communities.(3) If a third of the seats in the Central Legislature be reserved for the Muslims, then it would be difficult to allot the seats to the provinces.Under the circum stances, the Muslims shall have to be granted reservation of seats in the Punjab and Bengal, a suggestion which we have already discarded.Thus apart from such re servation being contrary to principles, it is difficult of practical application.(1) INCREASED REPRESENTATION NOT WRo.G IN PRINCIPLE.The first argument that it is contrary to the principle of Representative Government to grant to any com munity representation in excess of their population ratio is altogether wrong.Had it been otherwise, then in all international negotiations the bigger nations ,ivould have had a larger number of represe;ntatives than the smaller nations.But the fact is that, in the matter of votes, we find the small state of Belgium enjoying the same rights as the vast British Empire with its four hundred millions of population.Thus, in the consideration of national questions, it is not numbers alone that count, but there are also other factors to be taken into consideration.To my mind, in order to understand the principle of proportion in representation, it is necessary to understand the real significance of Representive Government.The basis of Representative Government lies in the principle

Page 155

[ )45 ] of individual freedom, subject to the limitations that, ( 1) for the purpose of a successful career, every man is ob liged to associate himself with some form of Government, and (2) exercise of freedom is permissible only so long as it does not interfere with the rights of others.In as much as these two objects cannot be attained without some kind of organisation, the necessity arises for the establishment of organised Governments.And since it has been admitted that every man is free, the best form of Government is one which requires the least sacrifice of individual freedom and gives to every man the maxi mum share in the work of administration.As Govern ments are always formed of large collection of men, and no large number of men can be expected to entertain the same views on all subjects, and further, as it is not possible to consult all men on every matter, it is so arranged that, instead of consulting the individuals on particular issues, the adult and the wise among them are asked to elect the persons, in whose opinion in affairs of the state they have their confidence, so that these persons might be asked to give their opinion on particular issues, as they come up for consideration.Save these, there is no other reason for the establishment of Repre sentative Government.But the whole chain of reasoning points to one basic principle, namely ,-freedom of the individual.Every man is free and has full right to make his own decision in all matters concerning himself.T 0 surrender personal rights for the sake of the government is a matter of necessity.Whoever surrenders such rights, makes a sacrifice for the sake of his country and the people.And what persuades him to make such sacrifice is the knowledge that men have different minds, if they differ from him in one thing, they are likely to agree with him in another.If, therefore, on a certain occasion he surrenders his own opinion for the sake of others, they

Page 156

[ 146 ] are likely, according to the same principle, to follow his opinion on another occasion.So far as it concerns the individuals, the above reason ing is quite effective, specially in matters relating to poli tics.But when questions of nationality and religion in tervene, the reasoning fails to hold good, for no body is prepared to sacrifice his nationality, or his religion.He is prepared to surrender his individual opinion for the sake of the majority, because, he hopes, that in some other matters the majority would follow his opinion ; but what consideration would induce him to sacrifice his nationality, or his religion? Can he hope that others would likewise be prepared for his sake to sacrifice their nationality, or their religion? And even supposing that some one be so prepared, can any honest man sacrifice his religion, because some one else is prepared to do so? Certainly not.Of sure, in such a situation he would demand that provision should be made for safeguarding his nationality or his religion, and only then, would he be prepared to surrender his birth right of freedorn in favour of the community as a whole.It is this question which is now before the people of India.The question before the Muslims is one of nationality and religion.Had it been merely a question of politics, they might have known that political views are always liable to change.But here are two different communities, and powerful communities living side by side who differ from each other in their religion and cul ture.How can the Muslims accept to live as a permanent minority in the presence of a permanent majority, so long as provision has not been made for the protection of their rights? Here is no question of political op1n1on, and therefore, no possibility of a minority changing place with a majority.The question here is one of national

Page 157

[ 147 ] and religiou§ rights.It js meaningless to urge that there should be mutual trust.1 1f that solves the difficulty, then why don't the Hindus trust the Muslims and grant them a majority of the seats as a gesture of confidence? Further, the situation in the States and in Governmental offices has got enough lessons for us.And if in spite of such warning, the Muslims should fail to provide adequate safeguards for their future position, it will be nothing short of national suicide.In short, the case of a permanent minority with another permanent majority cannot be decided on the same principles, as that of a changing minority with a changing majority.Its decision should follow the same pro�edure a� is observed in the case of a settlement be tween two hostile governments.And if under these cir cumstances, the Mussalmans demand increased repre sentation, their claim cannot be denied.There is no gainsaying the fact that Representative Governments are always run by majorities.When the Muslims are making such a big sacrifice as to entrust the Central Government into the hands of the Hindu majority, are they not en titled to so much as to say that no change in the consti tutional law should be made without their consultation? I have already referred to the conditions laid down by the Nehru Committee for changing the constitutional law, namely, that two-thirds of the members must vote for a such an amendment.Now, even if the Musli� repre sentation should be in proportion to their population, they would have only ¼ of the total seats.In other words it means that, even if not a single Muslim should vote in favour of an amendment, it may still be passed, for on a population basis not more than 25 % of seats would be allotted to the Muslims, while the Hindus would occupy as many as 75 % , and for amending the constitutional

Page 158

[ 148 ] law only 66% of the total votes is all that is required.In order, therefore, to give the Muslim elen1ent a proper weight in the Government, they should be allotted not 33 % , but 34 % of the seats in both the houses of Parlia ment.The Hindus under this arrangement lose nothing, for in any case, they retain the majority position.The Muslims do not de�and the right to rule the country.They demand only such rights as would obviate the danger of an infringement of their rights.They can rule India with 34 % of seats as }jttle as with 25 %.The Hindu contention, that in a Representative Government it is the majority that rules and therefore a minority has no right to demand representation in excess of their num bers, does not hold good, for the simple reason that Re presentative and elective Governments are originally based on the fundamental principle of individual free dom, and if this principle is unsound and invalid, then Representative Government is altogether a meaningless thing.But if this principle is sound, then 80 millions of Mu§salmans are certainly entitled to say that, when Representative and elective Governments are established in order to safeguard individual freedom, how can they reconcile themselves to a form of government that leaves the interests of ¼ of the population absolutely undefend ed? They do not desire for themselves a majority posi tion, but are they not justified to demand even so much power as would be a secu:::-ity for the continued enjoyment of those rights, which an elective and Representative Government is intended to ensure, and for the sake of which, individuals impose limitations upon their own free dom.If a majority, because of its permanent position of vantage, has right to rule, then what is the difference between the Representative and the Despotic for,ns of Government ? Nor should it be forgotten that the majority, to wh:ch

Page 159

- is usually conceded the right to rule, i§ a politicai majority.-fhis always changes according to changing circumstances, and is never a permanent body, nor such as is susceptible to religious bias in its decisions.When there is a fear that a particular majority would be sus ceptible to external influence in its decisions, and such majority is also permanent in nature, then the need arises for affording protection to the community which is likely to be the victim to such biased decisions.It may be urged that acco1ding to the above line of argument it would be necessary under every Government to grant to every religious minority representation in excess of their population ratio, and this would make a Representative Government altogether impossible.In answer, we may say that increased representation is in tended only for such minorities regarding which there is the apprehension that communal or religiou{i prejudices would work against them in their relation with the majority.In the absence of such special circumstances, a mere minority requires no special legislative aid.Even when there are more than one minorities whose co�bined strength is capable of deterring a majority from resort ing to oppressive methods, no special protective measure is needed.The difficulty in India is that there is only one important minority ; the Sikhs and the Buddhists though profes� to follow a religion different from that of the Hindus, are, nevertheless, a part of the Hindu body politic.Their presence does not work for the protection of the minorities.They actually strengthen the majority' 5 position.Had there been two real minorities in India whose combined strength would have formed an effective minority, India would not have been faced with the pro..blem of protection for Muslim interests.At present the only other minority in India except the Muslims is that

Page 160

[ 150 ] of � he Christians.These form only J % of the total popu lation.So negligible a quantity has on the one hand little to fear from the Hindus, and on the other is hardly strong enough to come to the help of the Muslims.I take this opportunity to refute the argument put forward by many people in connection with the Hindu Muslim differences, namely, that in the presence of so acute differences, India should not be granted Self Government.In my opinion, when there are means avail able to protect the interests of the minorities, there is no reason why the same should not be adopted and India granted Self-Government.In several European coun�ries acute differences have been admitted to exist between different sections of the population, but even then with adequate safeguards for the interest of the minorities, new governments have been established.There is no reason, that the example of the European countries should not be followed in India.(2) INCREASED REPRESENTATION NOT INJUSTICE TO OTHERS.The Nehru Committee further contends that to grant the Muslim demand for increased representation would be doing an injustice to other communities.I do not under stand what the committee means by this argument, and I am afraid, nor does the committee itself understand what the argui:nent is meant to convey.For, as a matter of fact, there is no minority community, which is going to suffer as a result of giving increased representation to the Muslims.In the first place there is practically speaking no minority worth the name other than the Muslim minority· The Buddhists in ilndia are more a section of the Hindu community to-day, than a people independent and ap art.•

Page 161

[ 151 ] Besides, they are not faced with the same danger as the Muslims.In national questions they, as a rule, join the Hindus.The Sikhs are more or less in the same pos1 tion.As for the Christian, they form only 1 % of the gross population, and most of them being converted from Hinduism, they have no past of their own with which they might justly feel associated ; and accordingly, as they have nothing to lose, they have nothing to fear.Besides, the Muslims do not propose to add to their own position at the expense of the Christian population.They contend that the majority community has such a margin of excess that it can afford to accommodate the Mussalmans without undermining its own majority posi tion.Clearly, therefore, when the question of depriving any of the minority communities of its legitimate rights does not arise, the minorities have little to lose from the Muslim demand.(3) ALLOTMENT OF SEATS NOT DIFFICULT.The third argument advanced by the Nehru Com mittee is that in the event of reserving seats for the Muslims, difficulty will be experienced in the matter of allotment of seats, and as a consequence, their right of representation shall have to be reserved both in the Punjab, and Bengal.This is hardly an argument, for the simple reason that it is exactly what the Muslims demand.I have already made it clear that it is only fair and just to grant reservation of seats to the Muslims both in the Punjab and Bengal.It is simply unreason- able to base an objection on what is already a point at issue.But even if it ,vere supposed that seats for the Muslims could not be reserved in the Punjab and Bengal, the objection hardly carries any weight.For, at the time of election to the Parliament the country would be viewed

Page 162

152.J as n whole, and ii· i� a fact that the Muslims in relation lo t·hc gros:-; population of the country form a weak n 1 iuority.T'hl'rcfore, even on the assumption that seats would not be rc-servc-d in the provinces, there is hardly nny sound argu1ncnt against such reservation in the Central Legislature.Such reservation could very easily bt eff ctcd.Before concluding, I take this opportunity to draw the ntt�ntion of the Hindus to the fact that if they are really anxious to see India free, they must show some genero sity of n1ind.They should at once disabuse their �inds of the false idea that they can trample upon the rights of the Moslems with impunity, and with success in the fight for India's freedom merely by virtue of their numerical superiority of 3 to 1.They must remember that though individua1ly speaking every Indian would be benefitted by Self-Government, yet considered in terms of communities, the benefit will go mostly to the Hindus, who form the overwhelming majority in the population.It is meet, therefore, that they should exercise generosity of mind and abandon their present policy of narrow mindedness, which should make even a minority blush.They should bear it in mind that it is the duty of the majority community to be generous.They should remember the words of Professor Murray, that both the parties should act not only in a spirit of forbearance but also of generosity ; and that in the opinion of the world it is the duty of the majority community to be the first in such generosity.( Vide Introduction to the Protection o/ minority by L.P.Mair, p.5).These words of Professor Murray apply to the case of the Hindus.But if the Hindus are not prepared to come to terms with the Muslim minority by conceding to

Page 163

[ 153 ] then1 "'rhat serves to secure their pos1t1on without endangering the position of the Hindu majority, then they should neither entertain the hope of winning the confi dence of the Muslims, nor that the latter would consider the new Government of India as a National Government.

Page 164

CHAPTER XI.Separate Electorates.DETAILED STUDY-( Continued ) The fifth demand urged by the Muslim community relates to the retention of separate electorate system, under which the Muslim would elect their own representa tives, and the Hindus their own.Muslim opinion itself was, however, divided over this question.Some suggest ed the retention of the system so long as the Muslims themselves were not prepared to abandon it ; while others agreed to its abandonment in favour of the joint elector ate system on the fulfilment of their demands as discussed in the fore-going chapters, provided of course, that the rights of the Muslim community had been adequately safeguarded both iu the provinces as well as in the Central Government.The separate electorate system has been supported by a considerable number of Muslims, but so far as 1 1 have been able to gauge public opinion on the matter, all are agreed that it is a temporary measure.It is, there fore, superfluous to discuss the respective merits of the two systems.The only point to be considered is, whether separate electorate does really meet the present temporary need of the Muslim co-μimunity.In fact, its retention is necessary on account of the mutual distrust between the Hindus and the Muslims.I think no body denies the existence of such distrust.The only question now is what should be the system of electorate during this period of mutual distrust.Even the Calcutta League was of opinion that unless certain conditions were fulfilled, separate electorate system should not be dispensed with.•

Page 165

[ 155 ] And as those conditions have not been fulfilled, it may safely and logically be concluded, that the League ( Cal cutta section) is in favour of the retention of this system.So far as I can understand, separate electorates would be helpful in banishing the present state of warfare be tween the two communities.It is irrelavent to ask ,-vhat it has helped to produce so far.For, it could as well be asked, what has the joint electorate system done so far to improve the mutual relations in the District Boards and Municipalities, where it is in force..The real thing, however, is that if the separate electorate system is at all objectionable, it 1s objectionable not from the view-point of inter-com munal relation, but for its 1n3urious effect upon the community itself.So far as inter-communal relation is concerned, separate electorate works for reduction of acerbity.Its chief defect is that it weakens the spirit of competition in a community.But under the present circumstances, when the Hindu-Muslim relation is so strained, it is simply indispensable.The consequence of its retention would be that the two com munities would settle down to work in a spirit of security.Our experience only strengthens the same opinion.We see that inspite of separate electorates, no legislative body has a purely Muslim Party.If the system had helped to foster disunity, it would have naturally led to the formation of separate Muslim and Hindu Parties in the Councils.The very absence of such parties shows, that the evil attributed to the system is in fact not due to it.At any rate, we find that under this system Muslims of all shades of opinion, Swarajists as well as the ad vocates of joint electorate system, have been able to win seats ; and similarly, those Hindus also who are c�-operat ing with the Muslims.Therefore, in so far as elections

Page 166

l 156 ] to the councils are concerned, the system does not seem to have produced any undesirable result.In my opinion, it should be mutually settled that after the satisfaction of the demands of the Muslim League and the attainment of Swaraj, the system of separate elector ates should remain in vogue for a period of ten years in those provinces, where either the Hindus or the Muslims should demand such a measure.During this period of ten years, it would be at the option of the community, at whose instance it was introduced, to give it up of its own accord.Otherwise, it would continue to work for the full term of ten years.After the expiry of ten years the system of joint electorates with reservation of seats should be introduced in those provinces where the Hindus or the Muslims are in a ,,veak minority, and should con t1nue to be in force till such time as the minority of its own choice should not forego its right.As for the Punjab and Bengal, the system of joint electorates with reservation of seats should be introduced for a fixed period of time upon the expiry of which, only the system of joint electorate should be retained.But the preliminary conditions of such an arrangement should be the actual attainment of dominion status, and the redress of Muslim grievances, so that the Muslim might reap full advantges of their opportunities and be able to stand upon their own legs.I consider it necessary to add that the above is put forward not as a formal proposal, but only as a sugges tion which might form a basis for discussion, and might lead to a solution agreeable to both the Muslim groups.Personally 11 am of opinion, that if the Muslims should get opportunities under an autonomous Government for a sufficiently long time to secure their own interests and to stand upon their own legs, then there is no reason

Page 167

[ 157 ] why they should not gradually improve their condition, and be able ultimately to face their opponents in the open field.Especially when this arrangement is proposed only for the Punjab and Bengal, ,vhere the l\1uslirns are in a majority position, I do not think the l\1uslims would be running any risk.At any rate, it is a mere suggestion, which might be considered by the Hindus and the l\luslims.And it is possible that it may lead to some sort of mutual understanding.I want also to have it understood that the system ot separate electorate is not entirely opposed to the prin ciple of representation, and the :mere fact that the system is r.ot in vogue in Europe, is no argument for its unsound ness.In a country where diverse communities with dis tinct religions and cultures live together, and their 1nutual relations continue to be strained from a very long time, it is simply indispensable to introduce some form of safe guards, without which the annihilation of the minority would be a foregone conclusion.The responsibility for such annihilation would lie with the majority, for in times of dispute it would be in the power of the majority alone to restore confidence in the minority.Thus, in this case it was only meet that, the Hindus should have suggested to the Muslims that they should elect their own repre sentatives separately, and the Hindus would elect theirs.But the strange thing is that they are not prepared even to accept the remedy when it is proposed by the Muslims.SEPARATE ELECTORATE NOT A CAUSE OF COMMUNAL TENSION.It is indeed a deception to say that the system of separate electorates fosters disunity.I have already re futed the argument in principle.I now turn to facts.Did the Hindu-Muslim disunity arise after the introduction of

Page 168

[ 158 ] separate electorates? If the answer is in the affirmative, I ask what was the proportion of Muslims in various Government departments previous to the introduction of the system? If it is a fact that before the introduction of the system, the Muslims enjoyed their full share of Government offices, then no doubt it will have to be ad mitted that the Hindus had no prejudice against the Mus lims before the system was introduced.But if the Mus lims' position was worse than it is now, then it shall have to be admitted that the prejudice is not the result of separate electorate, but on the contrary it was in con sequence of such prejudice that the Muslims were obliged to make this demand for separate electorates.And if it is proved that there has been an intensification of pre judice in these days, then the fact has to be ascribed not to separate electorates, but to the restlessness among the Hindus at the sight of the Muslims snatching away some of those privileges, ,vhich were so long the sole monopoly of the Hindus.I cannot conclude without adding that the object of representation is a faithful interpretation of the views of a people, and there is no doubt that such interpretation can be best done by a co-religionist.The fact must not be lost sight of that at the time of elections, people secure votes by appealing to matters which are irrelevant but calculated to excite public feelings.But during the col;lncil session there arise many such ques tions, as are completely unknown to the electorate itself.True and faithful representation can be done only by a co-religionist who can faithfully reflect the views of his constituency, even when a new matter comes in for consi deration.And this state of things is to continue, till the people learn to separate politics from religion ; and mutual tension disappears, and cordial relations grow among the

Page 169

[ 159 ] different communities with the consciousness of a united Indian nationality.Differences do not die out in a day, nor by mere pious wishes.As Professor Murray puts it, they disappear only gradually in several generations by the practice of mutual tolerance.•

Page 170

C H A P T E R XII.Pro'tection of Culture and Religion.DETAILED STUDY-( Continued) In respect of this demand I need not say much at this place, as I have already dealt at length with this question of safeguard for culture and religion in my vari ous wnbngs.I would only repeat here that religious conversions and religious propaganda should be free from every kind of restrictions.For the better elucidation of the subject, I think a brief list of the various safeguards imposed in Europe for the protection of the minorities would be helpful.I, therefore, give below a summary of those points, considered to be necessary for the pro tection of their culture and their religion, and I would recommend that these might be kept in view at the time of drafting a constitution for the country and arriving at a Hindu-Muslim understanding.In the Congress of Berlin in 1878 on the occasion of recognising the independence of Rumania, the following provisions were made in the interests of the Muslim and Jewish minorities : - (I) No one would be deprived of his civil or military rights on grounds of religion, nor debarred from Govern ment offices, or honours, nor from the assemblies, nor from joining the different professions and arts.(2) No one would be prevented from organising or forming religious association, or from meeting religious leaders within or without the country.Among the treaties made under the auspices of the.� League of Nations for the protection of the minorities,

Page 171

r 161 1 the undertaking has been tendered in the case of Poland that the Government shall be responsible for introducing primary education among the minorities in their own ver naculars in those districts and towns, where their numbers are considerable.lt has also been provided that in such districts, out of any amount voted for educational, charit able, or religious purposes, an adequate share in propor tion to their population shall be given to the minority.In Article 9, it has been laid down that these privileges can in no case be abrogated.Regarding the Jews, it has been provided in Article IO of the same treaty that the money set apart for their education shall be spent through the medium of com mittees elected by the Jews.In Article 11 , it has been provided that the Jews shall not be asked to do anything derogatory to the sanctity of their Sabath.The only ex ceptions are matters, concerning the Army and the Police.No elections shall take place on Saturdays.The undertaking was given by Yugoslavia that the Musli1ns shall have full liberty to follow their religious law in cases of inheritance.( This should be noted.) Government shall protect mosques, shrines, and other Muslim buildings.Wak} properties shall not be interfered with.( Important" to note.) No obstacle shall be put to the establishment of new wak}s and allied institutions in the future.In Czechoslovakia, the teaching of the Vernacular has not been restricted to the primary schools alone.Albania has undertaken to introduce such a system of electorates as would ensure complete protection of the national, religious and linguistic interests of the minorities.\

Page 172

[ 162 ] ln respect of Aland Isles, Finland agreed that th� people of the 1 1sles shall not be made to contribute funds for the schonls, where education is imparted in the Fi !l ish language.In connection with the Jewish minority, Poland further agreed that education in the religious institutions of the Jews shall be deemed to fulfil the requirements of the law of compulsory Primary Education.( Mussalmans should note).It was also provided that Jewish servants and soldiers shall be given time to offer their prayers, and further that they shall be given rations as sanctioned by their religion.Their religious teachers shall remain exempt from active service.( These points also should be remembered when negotiating a settlement ).The point also should be made clear that no depre catory and defamatory accounts of the kings of any people should form any part of the courses of school studies, as it tends to ruin the national character.This is done in some European countries.The Hindus seem to have a special aptitude for this most objectionable form of activity.The points narrated above clearly show that in con sidering the question of national protection, the immediate importance of a particular matter is not so material; what has to be considered is its effect, great or small, upon the national character of the people concerned.It is, therefore, essential to make complete provision of the protection of the religion, culture and language of the community in question.PROPER ENFORCEMENT OF LAW...I have already stated that there should be some guar- � 1 antee that the laws would be rightly administered, for it

Page 173

[ 163 ] is evident that without their proper enforcement the laws serve no useful purpose.To attain this end two means are generally adopted :-( 1) That the minority should be given its due share in all the services ; and (2) that there should be some final appellate authority to which appeals might be preferred in case of difference.The Muslim community has been continuously urging the first demand, but the plea of efficiency has been in variably adopted to keep them out of their rights.The pretext is however altogether without foundation.The Muslims are not at all inefficient.They are only falsely stigmatised as such.Instances are not wanting of <t Muslim subordinate being found deserving of every kind of preferment unde1· a European officer, but the moment he comes to be placed under a Hindu officer he is found to be incompetent.Such instances conclusively prove that there is no doubt about the capacity of the Muslim officers, but that there is a plot to suppress their merits, and attempts to poison the minds of the European officers a�ainst the Muslims by frequent report of inefficiency.The fact is evident, that the Hindus, being in the office from a longer t!me and in larger numbers and occupying the higher posts, find opportunities to prejudice the European officers against Muslim subordinates easily enough.As a consequence some Europeans also have been led to believe that Muslims are really inefficient, while as a matter of fact an examination of the past records of their services might easily show that most of the persons now condemned as inefficient, possessed a brilliant record previous to their coming under a Hindu officer.It is, however, much to be regretted that eve11 European officers are apt to rely on hearsays, and do not take the trouble to investigate the truth before passing a condemnation upon a whole nation.

Page 174

[ 164 ] The demand for representation in the services 1n pro portion to the numerical strength of a community should in no way be considered as opposed to current political theories.The demand has been urged on behalf of the European minorities, and its importance has been duly recognised.There is, therefore, no reason to turn it down in India as a foolish and absurd claim.In Poland, for instance, it has been recognised with regard to the Jewish minority that they ·' were to be admitted in due proportion to the public services, and allowed to hold non-commissioned rank in the army.'' (The Protection of Minorities, p.97.) The League Coun�il appointed a commission to repo:t on the Governmental organisation of Letivia.From their report it is evident that the commission attached great importance to this question of services.It said that the Jews were not being fairly treated.They were being given employment under Government JllUCh below their proportion in the population.( Ibid, p.113.) ,.• It will thus appear that the question of services can not be considered as a matter of minor importance.In fact it is essential that every community should receive a share of Government services proportionate to its numeri cal strength, so that the community may have opportuni ties to see for itself whether its rights, safeguarded by law, have not been disregarded in their actual applica tion.In short, it is necessary for the progress of every community that it should get a due and reasonable sha<e in th� services of the country, and it is important that it should be provided accordingly, in the future constitu- , tion of the Governmeht.

Page 175

[ 165 1 FUTURE OF GREAT BRITAIN.The other means to ensure the due enforcement of the laws of the constitution is that relating to appeals.The situation in India makes their means a little difficult of application.The ultimate goal assigned for India is that of Dominion Status.In my opinion this is a right goal, though some people regard it merely as a transi tional stage, and one that has been necessitated by the exigencies of the time.I am, however, of opinion that even intrinsically Dominion Status is the best form of Government, and particularly so for the Mussalmans.At present neither the British people nor the Indians do adequately realise the fact, that the Juture of Great Britain is linked with Asia and particularly with Islam.But God pleasing, the future will vindicate the truth of the fact.Great Britain under the stress of a habit cf thought grown for centuries, may or may not admit it, but the fact remains that its hold on Europe has loosened, and its old prestige has disappeared.To-day the Un1ted States of America has stepped into its place.Like England of a few centuries ago, the United States to-d�y are pledged to a policy of non-intervention in European affairs ; but like England under the force of circumstances the States shall be obliged in future to change this policy and actively take part in European politics.With 3 change in its policy the other powers would begin to �ealise its strength, and Great Britain shall be oblioed.=, ' in order to maintain its position, to seek for new allies , or better say, to set up new powers to join hands with it.And at that time it will be impossible for her to maintain her position of supremacy among the WorL:l Nations except by making common cause with Asia and particularly with Islam, just in the same way as the Roman Empire when it became converted into the Byzantine

Page 176

Enq ttOW('t llJH>Jt Asi;i, Wlu.:n FH \l.\n l "dll l '- rin tc..nv.,I..,, lo n.c'IHH of 1hit1 1·c nlity, th·.\th nti, n \i the.B1iti.h n ,tinH Hhnll I,.din·t "" lrt to such person or persons to pref er an appeal.The ap peal.as has been agreed to in the case of other Dominions

Page 177

[ 167 ] would lie in the Privy Council.11 have already stated that in the event of the Hindus being in power, no great weight is likely to be attached to such appeals, but in the event of the provinces being autonomous the Muslim voice is not likely to prove too weak to make such appeals a real deterrent in respect of infringement of the consl� tution.AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION.In addition to the abuse of the constitution there i�, as already mentioned, the question of the amendment cf the constitution.If it would lie with the majority com munity to change or amend it at will, all our postulations and efforts are useless, for the Hindus whenever they choose can deprive the Muslims of all their rights and privileges.It is essential, therefore, to provide that no amendment or alteration of the law would be possible without the consent of the one important minority.It is much to be deplored that there is no such provision ;n the draft before us.On the contrary, it provides that the law can be amended with only two-thirds of the total votes.As under the Nehru Scheme at least 75 % of the members in the Central Legislature would be Hindus, they could manage easily enough to change, amend, and alter the law with the Hindu votes alone.That the con stitution of a Government can be amended even against the will of a powerful minority cannot be conducive to the peace of the country.It is, therefore, most important that the Muslim proportion should be raised to at lea�t 34% or 33% so that no change be possible without th·�ir consent.To say that it is against principle to accord increased representation to any community is to betray complete ignorance of the constitutions of the world.In Czechoslo-

Page 178

[ 168 � vakia the minorities have been accorded representation in excess of their population ratio.This may be seen from a passage in the reply, given by the Czechoslovakian Government to the League of Nations in connection with a representation made to the latter by the German minority regarding their ill--treatment by the Czechoslovakian Government.The reply said that in spite of that, they ( the Germans ) held more seats in the national assembly than they were entitled to according to their numerical strength, and that if they could win a sufficient majority, they might be able to change even the constitution.(The Protection of Minorities, p./20.) In a word, one solution of the present difficulty, so far as I can understand, lies in allotting to the Muslim community 34% or at least 33% of the seats both in the Senate and in the Parliament, so that without their con sultation it should not be possible to change the laws of the constitution.The above remedy is proposed only for affairs of general interest.There will, however, be certain matters that affect the Muslims alone, and in my opinion these should not be interfered with without the consent of the community itself.These matters I have already referred to elsewhere.Regarding these, the decision of the Luck now Pact seems to be the best possible solution.That is, it should be provided that no change shall be made in the laws of the constitution, pertaining to these matters, with out two�thirds of the elected Muslim members of the Central Parliament voting for such change, and that such law shall be introduced only in those provinces where two�thirds of the Muslim members of the provincial body agree to the same.Such are the provisions which may help to safeguard the Muslim interests, and there is no reason why they should not be acceptable to the Hindus.

Page 179

C H A P T E R XIII.Duty Before Us.I have so far expressed my opinion on those salient features of the Nehru-Report that are related to the Muslim demands.I now propose to chalk out a line of conduct that it is desirable that we should follow.There might be many among us who, because of its many defects, would wish the Nehru-Report to be de stroyed altogether.I am opposed to such a view.From what I have written on the subject, the readers can easily see that I yield to none in my disapproval of the Report, so far as it concerns the protection of the Muslim inter ests.It cannot, however, be denied that it is the first attempt of its kind on the part of the Indians to present in detail the Indian view-point.As such, the Report deserves to have its defects removed if possible, and to be adopted as the united demand of the country.For, a people, accustomed to begin a task anew every day, never succeeds.The process of opening afresh the na tional problems is attended with the labour of examining every question anew, and wasting energy and time in fields, where already much has been spent.The new enthusiasm and zeal spends itself by the tirne one arrives at that very stage where things stood before.The result is that the country after having sacrificed its brain, time and money and even unity, returns, like the famous cattle at the mill, to where it was before the start.A people, undertaking to invent anew the railway and the telegraph with a view not to be under obligations to any other people, can never hope to march abreast with other na tions of the world.Accordingly, in my opinion, it should be our endeavour not to destroy the Report but to im...

Page 180

[ 170 ] prove upon it.We should not deny the compilers of this Report the credit of what is good in the Report, and should make patriotism and appreciation of services the motive of our work rather than jealousy and discord.Such a plan, I have every hope, will much facilitate our programme.We must not forget that the compilers of this Report with all their vast experience, and deep love for the country, were members of a particular religion and social circle, and it was natural that they should have leanings towards the same religion and society.We should, therefore, in dealing with them make full allow ances for this human weakness, and consider that if the decision had rested with us some of us might have been guilty of similar blunder.In my opinion, it is therefore meet in the interest of the country that we should deal with the Report in a spirit of criticism and not in a spirit of opposition.It is true that the Nehru Committee has stressed the point that its proposals, if accepted, should be accepted in toto.But the injunction is in no way binding upon the country.The Committee worked with the intention of producing something tangible.The task before us is to endorse the useful suggestions and to reject the rest.We have every right to make reasonable changes, and say to our compatriots, that as you have considered the best interests of your community, so we have deliberated over ours, let us now negotiate a setltement.RIGHT OF FRANCHI SE.In my opinion apart from the demands mentioned above, there are others that deserve similar consideration from an Islamic point of view.One of these is the ques tion of franchise.It is a very complex problem./ wish that the right of franchise should be extended to the

Page 181

[ 171 l Jem ale sex also.We cannot deprive a whole section of humanity entirely of its rights.At the same time it can not be denied that the introduction of adult and women suffrage would mean considerable loss to the Muslim community, on account of the general backwardness in education particularly among the females.Again there is the question of Purdah.If it were made compulsory for every voter, man or woman, to exercise his or her right of vote and punishment attached to default as is the case in Czechoslovakia, then perhaps the Musli� women might be induced to go to the polling station ; otherwise it is almost impossible.,It is, therefore, important to give our best thought to the question and devise some via media.FOREIGN RELATIONS.Another question relates to foreign relations.The Nehru-Report contains a brief note on this subject.It has cleverly avoided a discussion of the sub3ect in detail.The hint, however, is sufficient to serve as an eye-opener to the Mussalmans.It purports to suggest that the future Government of India shall deal with the neighbouring Asiatic Powers in the same way as is being done hitherto by Great Britain, through the agency of Government of India.To me it would be an evil day for the Muslim States, when the control of India's foreign policy would fall into the hands of those who have the intention of hoisting the Rag of ·,Om' in the Hedjaz, and they would control India's relation with Arabia, Afghanistan and Persia.The relations of Great Britain with these Asiatic States are based on an altogether different foundation.The consideration of economic supremacy alone governs their policy.But a free India, which is so early dream ing of political supremacy, will view these relations from a different standpoint.I am, therefore, of opinion that

Page 182

[ 172 ] it would be wiser to let Britain control the foreign policy, excepting the minor subjects such as trade, transit and •· ports, etc.Left to itself an Indian Government I am ' afraid, would interfere rather too much in matters relat- ing to neighbouring Muslim States.THE JuMAA.The third question relates to the sanctity of the /umaa ( the Muslim Sabath ).It is very important in so far as national existence of the community is concerned.Where the Jews, 3,500 years after the establishment of their Law, consider it essential to secure protection for their Sabath, and the Christians make stipulations in their treaties in respect of Sundays, there is no reason why the Muslims should not insist on facilities for the /umaa prayers being made an important part of the constitutional law.THE MUSLIM LAW.The fourth question relates to the Muslim law.In a mixed government the Muslims cannot enforce and in troduce their law of Shariat, but there can be no objec tion to their insisting on the enforcement of Muslim law in their own social and domestic affairs.HIGH COURT JUDGES.The fifth question relates to Hi�h Court Judges.In view of the autonomy in the provinces, it appears to me to be necessary to leave it to the Provincial Govern ments to appoint judges of their respective High Courts, and to the decision of the provincial councils to dispense with their services.The Nehru Scheme has left this power to the Governor-General ; but as constitutionally the Governor-General shall have to act in consultation with his ministers, most or all of whom ;n the case of the Central )

Page 183

[ 173 ] Government are likely to be Hindus, the arrangement would virtually bring all the Indian High Courts under the influence of the Hindus.There is, however, no objec tion to the Supreme Court being directly under the Gov ernor-General.Apart from these questions which have special rela-· tion to the Muslims, there are others of a more general nature that deserve attention from the community.The Compilers of the Nehru-Report, do not appear to have made a deep study of the constitutions, which have been adopted by the New States established after the war.I think a better constitution can be drafted if the matter be given more serious consideration.NATIVE STATES The problem of the Indian States has not yet been solved.The solution preferred by the Nehru Committee is neither sound nor acceptable to the States.The British sovereignty over the States has its basis in their superior power.Under the future constitution of India what would be the justification for one part of India to control another? It is, therefore, necessary to devise some such scheme as, on the one hand, would maintain the unity of India as a whole, and on the other, would prevent one part of the country from being subjected to another.To my mind, the institution of a permanent Imperial Conference in place of the proposed Senate.and the recognition of the internal autonomy of the States with adequate safeguards for the interests of their subjects, would afford a solution of the present problem.The Con..ference might comprise of the representatives of the pro vinces, of the delegates of the councils and of the States• , and it might deal with inter-provincial affairs and other subjects of all-India importance.The body should be

Page 184

[ J 74 ] concerned with matters relating to administration and not to l � gislation.It is also possible that this body should be invested with additional powers, and attached to the Go :7 ernor-General as a sort of Privy Councjl.It may also be invested with powers of arbitration in disputes relating to the constitution.In short, we should give further thought to the subject matter of the Nehru-Report ; and in order to do that, we must at once call an All-Muslim Parties Conference to which all sections of the community should be invited to send their representatives.I have been delighted to learn that some Muslim members of the Legislative As sembly have already begun the work in that direction, and it is proposed to hold such a conference in December, 1929.I think I need not, therefore, stress this point any further.I cannot, however, help drawing attention of the conveners of this conference to the fact that it would be useful to make the conference as widely representa tive as possible ; and the more generously the invitations are issued, the surer will be the success of the confer ence.It is also important that the invitations should be freely extended to the members of the opposite camp.Time for each speaker should be fixed, and the same rule should apply both to proposers and opposers.All parties should be given full opportunity to have their say.If the conference did not represent both the Nehruite and the ante-Nehruite groups of Muslim politicians, the general voice of the Muslim community would not rise strong enough.Opposition never weakens tho true cause : it rather strengthens it.Personal opinion should be subordin ated to the interests of Islam and the Muslims.If some one has a better proposal to make than our own, there is no reason why the same should be rejected.Instead of driving such a one away, we should invite him closer to..

Page 185

[ 175 ] us, and should listen attentively to what he has got lo say, for an opinion does not gain in strength by the sup port of fellow-thinkers, but by the criticism of opposets.The procedure should be that in that conference a dis cussion of the Nehru-Report should take place only on questions of principles, for that alone is possible in such a conference.After the principles have been decided, a sub-committee should be appointed to study closely the details of the recommendations, and to suggest improve ments and amendments, and to d1aft an elaborate scheme not confining itself to safeguards for Muslim interest alone, but traversing the whole field of constitutional ques tions ; and this draft should be presented to the next sit ting of the All-Muslim Parties Conference.If it finds un animous support from the Muslims or even from a majority of them, then it μiay be published.A complete draft of the constitution alone can be expected to create a stir in public circles ; a mere criticism cannot be ex pected to do the same.The stu created by the Nehru Report is also due to the fact of its being a complete proposal.Unless, therefore, we can put forward a com plete proposal by making necessary changes in the Nehru Report, in the eyes of the world we shall be regarded as adverse critics, and not as practical politicians.Another matter which is equally important is to con..vene meetings in all towns and cities to pass protest re solutions against the Nehru-Report, and send reports of the same to the Government.For, leaving aside the ques tion of co-operation or non-co-operation, we cannot deny that the Nehru-Report has succeeded in creating a stir in government circles.And if the Muslims failed at this juncture to raise a strong and effective voice of dissent, both the Government and the public at large will per force be led to ascribe it to their appreciation and accept-

Page 186

• [ 176 ] a � ce of the Nehru-Report.And if as a consequence of this wrong impression, some such changes be introduced in the constitution as are detrimental to the interests of the Muslim community, then it would indeed be really a hard job to rectify the mistake, and the old plea of status quo would stand in the way of safeguarding the Muslim rights.Apart from this, it is also necessary to hold pubiic meetings in order to educate Muslim public opinion re garding what pertains to their interest and advancement.The supporters of the Nehru-Report are traversing the country, and making every possible efforts to enlist public support for their views but the opposite group has taken no steps to explain the demerits of the Report to the general body of Muslims.And it is well-known that the public at large cannot be expected to understand these complex questions unaided.The secret of Mr.Gandhi's influence lay in his change of audience-in his appeal to the man in the street, while his predecessors thought the secret of India's success lay in their approach to the intelligensia.It cannot be gainsaid that the advocates of a democratic form of government cannot succeed without enlisting the support of the masses.It is not possible for any body to demand a democratic form of government, and at the same time to turn his back to the masses.It is, therefore, indispensable to educate the Muslim masses on the present state of affairs, and for that pur..• pose to hold meetings in all cities, towns and villages, and to consolidate the Muslim opinion.A conference of the enlightened can certainly help in arriving at a right and sound decision, but it will lack the power to make that decision effective unless there be the masses behind it.

Page 187

[ 177 ] Myself and the whole of the Ahmadiyya Community are prepared to co-operate in this matter with all other sections of the Muslims, and I promise to employ the whole of the wide and efficient organisation of the Ahmadiyya Community in the advocacy of this cause of Islam in every reasonable and proper way.It is also incumbent upon us to enlighten the British public opinion on the present situation.For the present I have arranged to distribute among the members of the British Parliament and other responsible Englishmen copies of the English translation of this brochure, (mean ing the Urdu original} so that they may be enabled to see for themselves that the Nehru-Report is by far the most biased, and altogether one-sided representation of the Indian view-point, and that the Muslim interests have not been safeguarded adequately under its scheme.·It is regrettable indeed that while the Hindu extremists, notwithstanding their profession of non-co-operation and tpublic condemnation of the British Government, have been always courting the favours of members of the British Parliament with the result that from two to three dozens of the members are very warm friends of the extremist Hindus, there is not a single member of the Parliament with genuine sympathy with the Muslim cause.Similarly, a section of the English-edited Press is under the Hindu influence, but the Muslims have not cared to enlist such support.Naturally, the Muslim voice is without that weight, which the Hindu voice carries in English political circles.While the Hindu non-co-opera tors, notwithstanding their non-co-operation, should in their personal capacity find it necessary to try to impress their views upon the British Statesmen, it seems strange to me why the same course should be neglected by the Muslims.A non-co-operator would say that the English

Page 188

[ 178 ] are enemies of India.But can any sensible man deny the wisdom of enlisting the sympathy of people from the enemy's camp? I, on my part, consider the British people as our friends, and it is my firm belief that the future of Great Britain and Islam will be daily linked closer.But I ask of those who consider the British as their enemies what greater success can there be than to win over people from the enemy· s side to our own ? It is the soundest and wisest tactics of war, and the person who neglects such tactics spells his own failure.Before concluding I once again warn the Mussalmans, that it is a very critical moment in their history.Dark clouds are thickening on the horizon.The time is ready to deal them with another blow.Once more the founda tions on which they had placed their greatest reliance, and the props that supported the structure of their edifice, are shaking.The men whom they considered as their own champions have joined the enemy's side a.nd are pre paring to give them battle.The wisdom and intelligence of the community have been again put to the test.God has intended to see whether and to what extent we have benefited by our past misfortunes and bygone experi ences.ft is now the moment for us to be wide-awake and on the alert.Instead of falling a prey to the spell of powerful writ_y-igs and eloquent words, it is time we should make use of our eyes and our ears, our intellect, and our hearts-those inestimable gifts of the All Beneficent Pro vidence.We should resolutely stand up, and refuse to put on the robes of dishonour offered to us.God had made the Mussalmans an honoured people, but alas ! they have encompassed their own disgrace.It is now up to them to cast off this disgrace and clutch at their ancestral robe of honour.

Page 189

[ 179 ] It should, however, be borne in mind what was 1 enjoined by the Holy Prophet (peace a.nd blessings be upon him and his followers ) -·' Whomsoever thou loveth, let thy love for him remain within bounds, and whomsoever thou disliketh let thy hatred for him remain within bounds.'' I The virtue of magnanimity is best tried at the time of opposition.It is necessary to make every effort to secure one's rights, but it is, equally important that no means should be adopted opposed to religion and honesty.I wonder why attempts are made to drown the voice of the opposing party.On the contrary, we ought to hear them, and also explain to them, our own view-points.Difference of views is, in fact, the key to the progress of the world.There is no use getting impatient with it.The dishonest would surely meet their deserts, but if our opponent is good-intentioned, then by refusing to give him a hearing we shall be merely closing the doors of virtue upon ourselves even if we are in the right.Instead of quarrels and violence, the Muslims should launch upon a continuous and unending series of endeav ours, c.nd should return love for hate and kindness for cruelty, so that the world may realise that the Muslims own a strength which no strm of jealousy or hatred can disturb; and that they possess a self-reliance, and are like the formidable rocks that stand intact in their places under all circumstances, and not like the small pebbles flitting before every gust of wind.And our last words are that all Praise is due to Allah, the Lord of all.

Page 190

SUPPLEMENT.A Brief Review of the Supplementary Report of the Nehru-Committee.After the publication of my criticism of their original Report, the Nehru Committee have issued a Supplement ary Report in which they have attempted to make some modifications on their original recommendations.In spite of these modifications my review hardly needs any alteration.But lest s�me people should think that the publication of the Supplementary Report has rendered some portions of my review unnecessary, I take this opportunity to express my views very briefly in regard only to those parts of the Supplementary Report which are calculated to affect the Muslims.1.Dealing with the question of free elementary education in the future Commonweaith of India the Sup plementary Report has, under the heading '' Funda mental Rights,'' added a proviso to the following effect, '• adequate provision shall be made by the State for im parting public instruction in primary schools to the children of members of minorities of considerable strength in the population through the medium of their own langu age and in such script as it is in vogue among them.'' ( Supplementary Report of the Nehru Committee, p.32, cl.4, Sub-cl.v.) The usefulness of this modification cannot be denied but the words embodying it are too vague and ambiguous, and there is �very likelihood that the Muslims will be deprived of the benefits that will accrue from it, and will fail to acquire education in their own script in many provinces.If in the light of the regulations of a similar nature, obtaining in the States

Page 191

[ 182 ] that came into existence in Europe after the Great War, the words • • of considerable strength in population,'· would have been made more explicit and their meanings and implications rendered more definite, this clause would have given some satisfaction to the Muslims.The word • • considerable '· used in this clause is so indefinite that in all probability in no province in which they are in minority will the Muslims be able to avail themselves of the concession it is intended to give to the minorities, whereas the Hindus and the Sikhs of the Punjab are sure to benefit by it.• 2.A further addition has been made in clause 17 under the same heading.But this addition, too, far from being beneficial to the Muslims may prove positively in jurious for them.It reads thus, " and Parliament shall also make laws to ensure fair rent and fixity and per manence of tenure to agricultural tenants." (Ibid., p.33).As far as I have been able to understand from reading the original report, it -is not within the purview of the Central Government to make laws of this nature.From Schedule No.I of the Nehru Report it appears that no power rests in the Central Government to legislate on matters governing the mutual relations of the landlords and tenants.Such powers are entirely vested in the Provincial Governments.Moreover this question in itself is of such vital im portance that it is impossible to attempt an all-India solu t ion for it, and the Government that will endeavour to enact a general law affecting equally all provinces, would decidedly harm the best interests of the country.The provinces, I think, should in this connection be left quite free to legislate as they deem proper and as it suits their own particular conditions, otherwise the Muslims, who

Page 192

l [ • 183 ] of all communities belong more to the agriculturist class, will suffer heavily.3.Another modification or improvement, if it can be so called, to which I take objection is in regard to the future language of the country.Under the heading.• • Language '' in the Supplementary Report we read.•' The language of the Commonwealth shall be Hindu stani, which may be written either in Nagri or Urdu character." (Ibid., p.33, Cl.4, Sub-cl.I).The ambi guity of the sense conveyed by this expression is such that it gives rise to a legitimate apprehension in the minds of the Muslims, lest all Government Reports should be written in Nagri script and the progress of Urdu should, in this way, be made to suffer from sheer neglect and indifference.And it is quite natural that if the use of Nagri character were encouraged by the Government.Arabic and Persian words would of themselves gradu ally disappear from the language, and the present forn1 of Urdu will completely become changed into a langu age, Urdu only in name but Nagri in substance end reality, particularly because Urdu words cannot adequate ly be expressed in Nagri characters.This arrangement will inevitably lead to the gradual but sure dying out of Urdu words making room for Bhasha words and will there fore, evidently be very detrimental to the interests of the Muslim Community and on occasions may be used against them.4.Under the caption, '' Parliament '' another Sub clause has been added to clause 13 A.which runs as follows:- ( a) '' In cases of great emergency and in matters of controversies between pr�vinces or a province and an Indian State, the Central Government and the Parliament

Page 193

[ 184 ] have a11 the powers necessary and ancillary includin,g \ the power to suspend or annul the acts, executive and legislative, of a Provincial Government.'' (b) ·' The Supreme Court shall have no jurisdiction in cases where the Commonwealth Government or Parlia ment has acted in exercise of the po'\ivers under the pre ceding sub-clause." (Ibid., p.36).The first part of this clause is attended with a danger of the gravest nature.That it invests the Central Gov ernment with the power and the right to suspend, alter or annul in cases of emergency laws, enacted by pro vincial governments, completely demolishes their inde pendent position.The rest of the clause, if couched in legal language so as to obviate the possibility of different inte.rpretations can be of substantial use and benefit.But the first part of it, I repeat, is extremely dangerous for the Muslims because the Hindu majority in the Central Government taking advantage of the words '' in cases of emergency '' would be free to interfere with the internal management of the provinces in which Muslims are in a majority and thus will seek to hamper and impede their progress and advancement.I, therefore, strongly object to this clause and suggest that the substance of the clause should be as follows:- (a) No Provincial Government shall have the power to frame laws calculated directly to affect the administration of any other pro..vince or the lives of its inhabitants ; and if any Provincial Government frames any such laws, the Central Government shall have full authority to suspend or annul it.(b) But in all such cases the Provincial Govern ment thus affected shall have the right to

Page 194

t f I 1 [ 185 ] appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision of the Central Government, if it finds that the Central Government, while sus pending or annulling the law framed by it has misused or overstepped its lawful authority.'' 5.An unwholesome change has also been introduced in clause 29 under the title ·' The Provincial Legisla tures.'' The Nehru Report had reserved the appointments of governors of provinces for the King.But the Supple mentary Report has transferred this royal prerogative to the Governor-General in Council.The modification sug gested by the Supplementary Report is '' there shall be a Governor of every province who shall be appointed by the Governor�General-in-Council." (Ibid., p.39, Cl.29).This change is, indeed, fraught with great risks.It has made the Provincial Governments entirely subservient and wholly subject to the control of the Central Govern ment.The appointment of governors should directly be made by the King and the Governor-General should have no voice in the matter as it is at present done in the case of the Presidency governors.6.Another modification is made in clause 72, part, vi.(Ibid., p.47).This modification aims at the creation of five new provinces.On principle we have no right to find fault with this recommendation, but it quite clear ly shows that the members of the Nehru Committee are possessed with an irresistible desire to see the Hindu element predo?linates over the Muslim element in respect of provinces as well as individuals.7.Regarding the amendment of the Constitution it was originally stated in the Nehru Report that the repeal or alteration of any of the provisions of the Constitutiond

Page 195

[ 186 ] could be effected by the agreement of..the 2/3rds of the total number of members of both Houses.'' The modified clause 87 of the Supplementary Report now reads as ·' the bill embodying such repeal or alteration shall be passed by both Houses of Parliament sitting to gether and at the third reading shall be agreed to by not less than four-fifths of those present." (Ibid., p.50).This alteration is, indeed, an improvement upon the original recommendation, but even this improvement does not adequately safeguard the interests of the minori ties.The repeal or alteration of any of the provisions of the Constitution should be made subject to the agree ment of 4/ Sths of all the elected members, instead of 4 / Sths of the members present at a particular sitting, because it is quite possible that on account of acute poli tical differences or as a protest against a certain measure, or owing to any other reason one section of the elected members of a legislature may be non-co-operating with other members, and the party then in majority in the House, taking advantage of the absence of a part of its members, should have an alteration made in the Consti tution or have a provision thereof repealed.To make amendment of the Constitution subject to the agreement of four-fifths of only the members present at a particular meeting places the foundations of this provision on a very weak basis.8.Dealing with the question of communal repre sentation the Nehru-Report had recommended, ·' there shall be no reservation of seats for any community in the Punjab and Bengal.'' The Supplementary Report amended this clause as �' there shall be no reservation of seats for any community in the Punjab and Bengal, provided that the question of communal representation

Page 196

[ 187 ] will be open for reconsideration, if so desired by any community after working the recommended system for 10 years." ( Ibid.p.50.) The amendment is quite meaningless.In a representative form of government the decision of the majority is always enforced.This modification gives no guarantee to any minority even if they insist and persist in their demand for reservation of seats that after 10 years reservation of seats will actually be granted to them.What is offered them is that the question of communal representation will only be open for reconsideration.But after the expiration of 10 years the question of communal representation is recon isdered, and the Hindu majority in the Central Govern ment decides rhat no change in the existing law is possible, in what conceivable manner would the Muslims get back their lost rights? In view of the fact, this modification is highly deceptive and is nothing short of jugglery in words.The last but not the least change to which I object is that which is introduced in Clause 4 under the heading • • Communal representation.'' The original recom mendation of the Nehru-Report was '' Reservation of seats, where allowed, shall be for a fixed period of ten years.'' To this clause have been added the words '' provided that the question shall be open for re consideration after the expiration of that period if so desired by any community." ( Ibid.p.51.) This addition is clearly superfluous.The words '· the question shall be open for reconsideration '' lay down no fixed policy, no definite course of action.Evident! of all minorities it is very largely for the sake of t{' Muslims that the.provision for the reservation of seat: ha _ s been m � de � n the Co � stitution.If the exercise of this concession 1s beneficial to them, it requires no

Page 197

[ 188 ] special intelligence to understand that they will never demand its repeal or alteration.Whenever any demand is made to repeal or alter this provision, the Hindus alone will make it.In other words the amended clause means that if after the lapse of ten years the Hindus will demand that the Muslims should enjoy this conces sion no longer, this question will again be considered.The consideration will demonstrably be made by the Central Government in which the Hindus will ever be in a majority and the decision in such a case can easily be imagined.After this short review of the Supplementary Report of the Nehru Committee, I venture to reiterate my contention that the modifications and alterations �m� bodied in the Supplementary Report ,vill do more harm than good to the Muslims.All I can say in favour of the Nehru Committee is that it has shown great adept ness and dexterity in the choice of words and phrases which are susceptible of interpretations bearing a sense quite opposite to that they apparently intend to convey.But this is not commendable.In the end I most earnestly appeal to the Muslim public and to my English brethren beyond the seas that they should refuse to lend any support whatever to the Nehru-Report without first understanding and realising fully the nature and significance of its recommendations.Let the British people know that though they are certainly at present the rulers of India, they are not the masters of the Indian people.They have, therefore, ·no right to give in perpetual enslavement to the Hindus and 80 million of Muslims of India.The nation which claims to have contributed so large a share to the emancipa� tion of slaves all the world over would irretrievably (

Page 198

l 189 l lower itself in the estimation of future generations, if in this age of freedom and liberty it would.by a mere stroke of the pen, hand over in everlasting slavery 80 millions of free souls to a community which is notorious for meeting out the most heartless and disgraceful treatment to its slaves.The slaves of every othet nation have, in the course of time, come to their own and regained freedom.But after the passage of thousands of years the slaves of the Hindus under the name of � • untouchables '' even to-day bear most melan choly testimony to the extremely inhuman and cruel institution of slavery as practised among the Hindus.Let England beware that the moment she makes up her mind to free India from her bondage, the Muslims of this country will naturally regard themselves to have got their freedom.They will then be perfectly justified to demand the protection and security of their political rights, and if these are not conceded they will be entitled to refuse to associate ther:1selves with any system designed to crush their independence, and will have to set up a new one under which they will be able to maintain their liberty.The Muslim believes in One All-Powerful God, and fears none but Him.He will never stoop to be treated like •• Untouchables " by any community and will consider no sacrifice too great to combat any mischievous attempt to enslave him.--:o:-- THE END.

Page 199

Page 199