1064 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
If I remember well there was a Christian member, Mr. Chatterji, of the House in those days. He too pointed out that it went against their religion and as such it should not be applied to them. There were speeches of this nature. But in spite of all that opposition the Government applied it to all sections of the population because it was, in fact, good measure. My submission is that if monogamy is really a good thing why don’t you impose this restraint on all sections of the population and why do you leave out some people from its purview. May be some Muslim friends are having two wives—there are very few such cases in Hindu society. Generally it has been seen that people from lower classes alone keep two wives but they keep them only to help them in their occupations. Broadly speaking, the majority of Hindus are monogamous either by nature or by circumstances. It is difficult to get even one wife, wherefrom can one get two ? At that time it was stated in the Select Committee Report that :
“ The object of the Bill, as introduced in the Legislature, was to impose restraint upon the solemnisation of child marriages and the method adopted was, broadly speaking, that of declaring all marriges of boys and girls below a certain age to be invalid.”
I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the aim and object of the Sarda Act was ‘to declare the marriage to be invalid’. But afterwards it was altered. And why was it altered ? It was done because it would have been very strict. You have to keep this thing in view. I would speak about monogamy when I would come to it. After making alterations it was laid down :
“ The Bill has been circulated under the orders of the Government and has elicited a strong expression of feeling that it is objectionable both on religious and on legal grounds of interfere with the validity of a marriage which has been performed.
In our opinion, these objections are at present insuperable and we have accordingly acted upon a suggestion which has been widely made that the Bill should effect its purpose of restraining child marriages not by declaring such marriages to be invalid but by imposing punishments upon those who participate in them.”
You would see what a difference it has made. The things that were formerly contemplated to be rejected, were not rejected. Those marriages were not made invalid. But some punishments were imposed on them. Further it was laid down that :
“ The Bill, as introduced applied to Hindus, Jains, Sikhs, Brahmos, Arya Samajists and Buddhists and was a measure relating