Discussions Over Hindu Marriage Bill

WE are decidedly of opinion that, subject to one reservation, the attitude of the Government of India in regard to Mr. Patel’s Hindu Marriage Bill is substantially correct. Mr. Patel having moved at Thursday’s meeting of the Council that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee consisting of certain official and non-official members, Sir William said that the feelings of a great many official members and also the Government in regard to the Bill was one of great sympathy. It was a permissive measure and was in no sense obligatory, and educated Indian opinion was strongly in its favour. Nor was he much impressed with the argument that the Bill dealt a direct blow at the foundation of the Hindu religion. At the same time, it was unquestionable that there was a cleavage of opinion on the Bill, a cleavage which, in his opinion, Mr. Patel had sought to minimise. It was this last fact which made it eminently desirable that instead of a Select Committee, such as was proposed by Mr. Patel, a committee of all the non-official members with the Law Member as an expert to advise them on legal points and points of drafting should examine the Bill before it came up for discussion at a meeting of the Council itself, and we are glad the Home Member proposed this course. We are equally in agreement with the Home Member in the warning he addressed to Mr. Patel against raising a hornet’s nest and in his deprecation of an attack upon the Brahmin community in connection with the Bill. If there was one thing, he said, which the Council would not hear, it was what might be thought an unfair attack on the Brahmin community. Where we do not agree with the Home Member is as regards his statement that it was carrying the idea of communal representation to a ridiculous length to say that Mahomedans were not to vote on any such measure if they so desired.

Join Whatsapp Channel of The Tribune for latest updates.