Then, the next thing is how to give full effect to these considerations. I submit, Sir, that so long as it is recognised that the minorities should be kept satisfied, that their views and their grievances should be given an effective voice in the deliberations of the Legislature, I do say that the only way is to get at that man in that community who really represents that community. On the other hand, if you say that community has: no right to exist as a community, and that it should be effaced by one stroke of the pen, then, Sir, I am certainly out of court. But you have to recognise, and it, is absolutely necessary to recognise, that there are communities with vital differences among themselves, whether on grounds of religion. or other differences. There are such communities, and it is our duty to provide for them constitutionally, that they are all adequately represented and the best and only effective way in which any particular community can be represented is by laying down a procedure by which the best man who can represent that community, who can voice forth the feelings of that community is elected to the legislature. That is the, sole criterion on the basis of which we have to look at this question. The question now is whether in order to achieve that end, it is necessary to have separate electorates or not. That the interests of the communities should have a representation in the legislature is conceded even by the Report of the Committee. The only difference is that they want to achieve that purpose by some other means and I say by that means the end will not be achieved at all. What the Minorities committee says is, “Reserve a certain number of seats to candidates belonging to that particular community but on the basis of the joint electorate”. Then, it is that person whom the majority community backs that will be elected. Perhaps that man may be a man liked by the majority under the guise of belonging to, the minority community. There have been instances in which Muslims and Hindus joint together, in the old days of Non-Co-operation, and boycotted all legislatures, and simply for the sake of fun, some illiterate sweeper or scavenger, or some such person, was put up as a candidate as coming from a particular community in order to make a mockery of the, whole show. If that could be done in those days, what I am asking is, whether such things will not reoccur. Of course it all depends on the spirit in which the question is viewed, but I say the mere fact that a particular member belongs co a particular community is not a guarantee that his views represent the views of that particular community. That particular community, if at all it is to be represented, has got to elect the right man from among the members of that community. That is my appeal to you. If a worthless man or a man who is not capable of even understanding the needs of the community is elected from a particular community, he cannot be expected to represent that community simply because he is labelled as one belonging to that community. I submit, Sir, this is the criterion which should decide whether this report has given effect to the principle which they have accepted, namely, that the minority communities should be represented on the legislature. If, on the other hand the existence of the minorities and their right for representation are denied, well, then I have nothing more to say. But I would request you to approach this question in a generous spirit. I would request the Hon’ble Members to remember the days in which in pursuance of the Lucknow Pact of 1916 separate electorates were recognised and the spirit in which both communities moved as brothers in the non-co-operation days of 1920. Now, Sir, if the communities were able to move as brothers and sisters in those days and they could lay the foundations for the achievement of independence which we have now gained, I do not see any reason why we cannot hereafter work en the same principle as brothers and sisters and work as members of the same family and make India one of the proudest nations in the comity, of nations. It is up to us to make India the foremost nation in the world, provided we act in a spirit of cordiality and friendship. In view of the spirit in which we were working in 1920 in the non-co-operation days, I say it is possible for us to work in the same spirit hereafter also. And I submit to you Sir, that it is up to the Members of this House to set an example by divesting themselves of pre-conceived notions that all the ills of the country were due to this system of separate electorates. I do not want to enter into discussions as to the correctness or otherwise of this notion. My only appeal to you is to join the Hon’ble Mover in asking you to forget the past and to act in a friendly spirit in the future.
