Discussion on Enfranchisement of Women

THE most important amendments moved on Thursday were those relating to franchise for women, the residential qualification, the widening of the franchise, the free discussion of matters relating to the safety and tranquility of a Province, Fiscal autonomy and the Statutory Commission. As regards the first, Major Hills made a proposal the effect of which would have been to enfranchise 1,000,0000 Indian women at once along with 5,000,000 Indian men. In support of his proposal the Major put forward three arguments. In the first place, the only plausible argument against his proposal, he said, was that women in India were mostly illiterate, and this argument had no force in the present case because the Bill itself was not based on education. Secondly, a very high standard of knowledge, ability and practical judgment existed in the East independently of book learning. Thirdly, the proposal could not be dismissed as impracticable, because many women at Bombay voted at municipal elections. Earl Winterton, in strongly supporting the amendment, suggested that refusal to enfranchise women might create a suffragette movement in India. Mr. Montagu in his reply admitted that the force of the demand for women suffrage in India was overwhelming, and that the majority of the evidence given before the Joint Committee was in favour of it. At the same time, he contended, there was strong opposition to the enfranchisement of women in many parts of India. From these more or less safe premises, Mr. Montagu drew a conclusion that Parliament should not deny to Indian women the opportunity of becoming enfranchised, but the Indians should be left to decide the question themselves. The correct conclusion would have been that the principle of enfranchisement of women be incorporated in the Bill.