Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

12. Now the identity of a Hindu caste as a unit is preserved (a) by the almost total exclusion of any accession from outside, that is, by confining accessions to its members to increases by births (legitimate births except in very few cases like the. children of dancing girls) and (b) by confining valid marriages to persons belonging to the same caste. Now it is almost impossible to impose such restrictions on the so-called caste Christians because restrictions as to intermarriage (other than restrictions as to incestuous connections and bigamous connections) cannot be legally recognized among Christians. Suppose that some Brahmin Hindus become Roman Catholic converts and settle in the plaint village, can the Pillaimars and Mudaliars prevent them from using the southern wing and can the Nadars and the other converts who sit with them (like Pariah Christians) prevent the new converts from occupying the northern wing? Supposing the Bishop or the Parish Priest appointed to the Church was a Nadar or Panchama convert, can he be prevented from going into the southern wing or getting up the chance] for fear of polluting that wing or part of the Church by his presence? Can excommunication of a Pillai Christian from caste by the vote of the community because he dined in a Shinar's house be recognized by Courts and can Courts prevent such a Christian from using the southern wing because those who excommunicated him were afraid of pollution by his contact? Supposing, a Nadar Christian male marries a Vellala female and children are born and baptised into the Roman Catholic faith or suppose an excommunicated Brahmin female gives birth to illegitimate children by unknown fathers and they become Roman Catholic converts and settle in this Parish, to what caste are they to belong and in what wing of the Church are they to be made to sit? To recognize castes among Christian communities as distinct corporations with exclusive legal rights as caste corporations would lead to complications and anomalies of such a far reaching character that I am not prepared to extend the recognition by Courts of Hindu castes as distinct corporations for certain purposes to so-called caste Christians. It follows, therefore, that the alleged agreement of 1854 even if it is established, cannot bind any other persons except the particular individuals who entered into that agreement, assuming that it would bind even them as individuals. That alleged agreement being more than 60 years old, very few, if any of the parties to the agreement, can now be living. (Of the parties named in the plaint, I find only 5 could have been born then and as all of them must have been boys or children at that time, they could not have been parties to the alleged agreement.)

13. In the Kamudi temple case Sankaralinga Nadan and Ors. v. Raieswara Dorai (1908) I.L.R. 31 M. 236 S.C. 18 M.L.J. 387 the learned Subordinate Judge excluded Hindu Nadirs from access to a particular temple on the ground that the temple itself would be polluted according to the Hindu ecclesiastical law by the admission of Shanars, into it, The Madras High Court also referred to the entry of Shanars, Pallars, Pariahs and Chucklers into the temple as causing pollution and, to the Shastras prohibiting the Shanars from so entering the temple. Their Lordships of the Privy Council (through Lord Robertson) make the following observations in their Judgment - "It is alleged by the respondents that the presence of persons belonging to the appellants' caste is repugnant to the religious principles of the Hindu worship of Shiva and to the sentiments of the caste Hindus who worship in this temple, and that it is contrary to custom in this temple.