820 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
the composition of the Upper Chamber in the different provinces. The only thing it does is that it also provides that Parliament may by law alter at any time the composition laid down in this new article 150. I hope that this compromise will be acceptable to the House and that the House will be in a position to accept this amendment.
- The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Mr. Vice-President, Sir, out of the amendments that have been moved, I am prepared to accept the amendments moved by Mr. Sarwate. I think he has spotted a real difficulty in the draft as it stands. The draft says—‘University in the State’. It is quite obvious that there are many States with at present no university. All the same there are graduates from other Universities who are residing in mat State. It is certainly not the intention to take away the right of a graduate residing in a State to participate in the elections to the Upper Chamber merely because he does not happen to be a graduate of a University in that particular State. In order therefore to make the way clear for graduates residing in the particular Stale, I think this amendment is necessary and I propose to accept it. I would only say that the word ‘habitually’ is perhaps not necessary because residence as a qualification will be defined under the provisions of article 149 where we have the power to describe qualifications and disqualifications.
With regard to the other points of criticisms I do not know that those who have indulged in high-flown phraseology in denouncing this particular article have done any service either to themselves or to the House. This is a matter which has been debated more than once. Whether there should be a Second Chamber in the province or not was a matter which was debated and the proposition has been accepted that those provinces who want Second Chambers should be permitted to have them. I do not know that any good purpose is served by repeating the same arguments which were urged by those Members at the time when that matter was discussed.
With regard to the merits of the proposition which has been tabled before the House, I have not seen any single constructive suggestion on the part of any Member who has taken part in this debate as to what should be the alternative constitution of the Second Chamber. Here and
- CAD, Vol. IX, dated 19th August 1949, pp. 490-91.