z:\ ambedkar\vol 08\vol8 04.indd MK SJ+DK 1 10 2013/YS 13 11 2013 259
PAKISTAN : COMMUNAL AGGRESSION 259
Muslim Provinces from the control of the Hindu Government at the Centre was the object for which demand No. 5 was put forth.
These demands were opposed by the Hindus. There may not be much in this. But what is significant is that they were also rejected by the Simon Commission. The Simon Commission, which was by no means unfriendly to the Muslims, gave some very cogent reasons for rejecting the Muslim demands. It said* :—
“ This claim goes to the length of seeking to preserve the full security for representation now provided for Muslims in these six provinces and at the same time to enlarge in Bengal and the Punjab the present proportion of seats secured to the community by separate electorates to figures proportionate to their ratio of population. This would give Muhammadans a fixed and unalterable majority of the general constituency seats in both provinces. We cannot go so far. The continuance of the present scale of weightage in the six provinces could not—in the absence of a new general agreement between the communities—equitably be combined with so great a deparure from the existing allocation in Bengal and the Punjab.
“It would be unfair that Muhammadans should retain the very considerable weightage they enjoy in the six provinces, and that there should at the same time be imposed, in face of Hindu and Sikh opposition, a definite Muslim majority in the Punjab and Bengal unalterable by any appeal to the electorate........”
Notwithstanding the opposition of the Hindus and the Sikhs and the rejection by the Simon Commission, the British Government when called upon to act as an arbiter granted the Muslims all their demands old and new.
By a Notification† in the Gazette of India 25th January 1932 the Government of India, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 52A of the Government of India Act,
1916, declared that the N.-W. F. Province shall be treated as a Governor’s Province.‡ By an Order in Council, issued under
*Report, Vol. II, p. 71.
†Notification No. F. 173/31-R in the Gazette of India Extraordinary, dated
25th January 1932.
‡The Simon Commission had rejected the claim saying : “We entirely share the view of the Bray Committee that provision ought now to be made for the constitutional advance of the N.-W. F. P. ............. But we also agree that the situation of the Province and its intimate relation with the problem of Indian defence are such that special arrangements are required. It is not possible, therefore, to apply to it automatically proposals which may be suited for provincial areas in other parts of India.” They justified it by saying: “ They inherent right of a man to smoke a cigarette must necessarily be curtailed if he lives in a powder magazine.”—Report, Vol. II. paras 120-121.