Vol. 13 · pages 1231–1235

With regard to the suggestion of my friend all that it means is that there should be a marginal note giving the chapter number of the Interpretation Act of 1889. That is a matter for the draftsman to consider, and if he thinks such a marginal note is necessary, he will no doubt consider the matter. But this marginal note is not added against the clause of the other Acts which amend the Government of India Act of 1935. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : Although Dr. Ambedkar says that in all the previous Acts this clause appears, yet I beg to point out that in Act No. V, there is no such clause. I pointed out the omission but I was over-ruled. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : That was a self-contained Act. It required no reference to the Interpretation Act at all. [The amendments of Naziruddin Ahmad were negatived and clause 2 was added to the Bill.] ***** Clause 3 *Shri H. V. Pataskar : Sir, I move : “That in clause 3, after the words ‘alter the name of any Province’ the words ‘after ascertaining the opinion of the members of the Legislature of the province whose name is proposed to be changed’ be added.” ***** †The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, dealing first with the amendment of Mr. Pataskar, I am afraid I must point out that it would not fit in within the framework of section 290. My friend does not seem to have noticed that to the various sub-clauses of clause (1) of section 290 there is a general proviso which applies to all the sub-clauses (a), (b), (c) and (d). If he refers to that proviso he will find that his amendment would introduce double conditions for the operation of the new clause, namely sub-clause (e). Sub-clause (e) would be subject to the condition he wants to lay down in his amendment, namely, ‘after ascertaining the opinion of the members of the legislature of the province whose name is proposed to be changed’. In addition to that, sub-clause (e) would also be governed by the proviso, namely that the Governor-General shall ascertain the views of the Government of the province. In view of this there would arise a very difficult condition, according to his amendment, the Governor-General will be bound to ascertain the wishes of the legislature. According to the proviso to section 290, he will be bound to ascertain the views of the Government of the province. He will therefore put himself in a double *CAD, Official Report, Vol. XI, 25th November 1949, p. 930. † Ibid., pp. 935-937. 1198 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES

difficulty by reason of the fact that the Governor-General will have to consult two different bodies, that is not going to be a very easy matter. Secondly, he would realise that it is not quite justifiable that sub-clauses (a) to (d) should be governed by a single proviso, while the new sub-clause (e) should be governed by two provisions. Shri H. V. Pataskar : That is not so. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : That is what I say. How do you know? Therefore it seems to me that he is putting himself and the Governor-General in a somewhat difficult position by making such a suggestion. Do not therefore think that at this stage it would be logical to accept it, whatever be the merits of the suggestion. Coming to the amendment of my friend, Mr. Sidhava, he seems to me to have completely confused the intention of this article and the provisions contained in the new Constitution. He speaks of Parliament and requires that the order made by the Governor-General be placed within three days of its making before Parliament. Mr. Sidhva has evidently forgotten that, when he speaks of the Parliament, he speaks of the legislature which comes into being on the 26th January 1950. On that date the Governor-General disappears, and this section 290 as well as the sub-clause (e) which I am trying to introduce by this measure will also disappear. On the 26th January what will be on the Statute Book and operative would be the provisions contained in article 3 of the new Constitution. He has, I am sorry to say, not paid sufficient attention to the point that I have sought to make. Shri R. K. Sidhva : What the Governor-General does will be binding upon the President. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : It seems to me that both these suggestions are impracticable. As to the general proposition whether Parliament should be brought in or not, we have to deal with two matters. One is that there is a general desire on the part of some of the provinces that the names by which they have been called under the Government of India Act 1935 do not smell sweet according to them, and they would like to begin with the names which they think are good enough for them on the date on which the Constitution commences. The Constituent Assembly felt at the time when the matter was discussed last time that this desire of some of the provinces whose names are not good enough in their own opinion has a good case and therefore a provision ought to be made for the Governor-General before the commencement of this Constitution to take such action as he thinks necessary to carry out the 1199DRAFT CONSTITUTION

desires of the provinces. Therefore it seems to me that such a provision is necessary. A certain amount of fear has been expressed that some provinces might suggest to the Governor-General names which may not be possible in the opinion of the other provinces, and consequently names which have been rejectd by this House or disapproved by this House may be given to the new provinces without the knowledge of this Constituent Assembly or without the consent of the provincial legislatures concerned. It seems to me that that sort of suggestion is reading too much into section 290 as amended by this Bill because under section 290 the Governor-General has absolute discretion in this matter and is not bound to act upon the suggestion made either by the Provincial Government or, if I accept the amendment of Mr. Pataskar, the opinion of the legislature. He is free to act and the only authority who is to advise him to act is the Cabinet at the Centre. All that is required under section 290 is to ascertain the views of the Government of the Province. That does not mean that the Governor-General is bound to accept any name that has been suggested. I am quite certain in my own mind that the discussion that has taken place in this House, the opinions expressed by this House on the suggestion made by Professor Saksena in regard to the name of the United Provinces will be taken into consideration by the Central Executive and by the Governor-General before he decides to take any action under the proposed amendment to article 290. Mr. President : I will now put the amendments to the vote. Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad, do you want your amendment to be put to the vote? It is only a matter of punctuation? Mr. Naziruddin Ahmad : It may be left to the Drafting committee. The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : It is a worng amendment. [Clause 3, Preamble and the title were adopted and added to the Bill.] *The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : Sir, I move : “That the Bill further to amend the Government of India Act, 1935, as settled by the Assembly, be passed.” ***** The motion was adopted. ***** *CAD, Official Report, Vol. X, 25th November 1949, p. 937. 1200 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES

DRAFT CONSTITUTION—(contd.) *Mr. Frank Anthony (C. P. & Berar : General) : Mr. President, sir, first of all I wish to thank you for the unfailingly courteous and gracious manner in which you have invariably presided over the deliberations of this House. Deserving tribute has already been paid to the Drafting Committee for the way in which it has performed its arduous and responsible duties. I would like very briefly to pay a particular tribute to my honourable Friend, who is sitting on my right, Dr. Ambedkar. I do not believe that any one of us can really gauge the volume of work and the intensity of concentration that must have been involved in the production of this voluminous and by no means easy document. And while, on occasions, I may not have agreed with him, it always gave me the very greatest pleasure to listen to his tremendous grasp not only of fundamentals but of details, of the clarity with which he invariably presented his case. It has been said that this Constitution has received a mixed reception. It is inevitable that its reception should have been mixed because, inevitably, it is a mixed Constitution. It is composite in character. I believe that it is a blend and a proper blend between idealism on the one side and realism on the other. I know that some of my ardently idealistic friends have criticised it. They would like to have seen instead of this blend something in the nature of a decalogue or the Ten Commandments, something which was so wholly idealistic that it would have wilted and died under the first impact of administrative realities and political difficulties. As I have said, I believe that we have borrowed enough from idealism to make the Constitution a fairly attractive and an aspiring document and on the other hand we have not based it entirely on material, from mundane considerations so as to retard or in any way to take away from this the inspiring elements. I realize, Sir, that it is not a perfect document, but at the same time I feel that in hammering it out, we have traversed all the processes of the democratic manufactory, that we have ranged through the whole gamut of democratic factors; there has been careful thought; there has been close analysis; there has been argument and counter-argument; there has been fierce controversy and at one time I thought that the controversy was so fierce that we might reach the stage of what the Romans called Argumentum ad baculum that is, settling it by actual physical force. But in the final analysis has pervaded a real sense of accommodating and a real feeling of forbearance.... *CAD, Official Report, Vol. X, 25th November 1949, pp. 938-939. 1201DRAFT CONSTITUTION

*...May I end on this note—I believe that by and large we have hammered out a good Constitution. It will be fallible and it will be necessarily imperfect as it is the product of imperfect human beings. But I believe we have done a good job of work and I believe that this Constitution deserves not only our good wishes but our blessings. But in sending it out on its mission with these blessings, I feel that the paramount consideration which should be before us permanently is not that we have framed a voluminous and important document— not that we have sought to give careful and elaborate guarantees to minorities, but that ultimately the final test by which this Constitution will be judged and by which it will stand or fall, the final test will be the intention and the spirit with which the provisions of this Constitution are worked. †Dr. Pattabhi Sitaramayya : ...Finally let me ask you :— “What after all is a constitution ?” It is a grammar of politics, if you like, it is a compass to the political mariner. However good it may be, by itself it is inanimate, it is insensitive, and it cannot work by itself. It is of use to us only in the measure in which we are able to use it, because it has tremendous reserve force, and everything depends upon the manner in which we approach it, whether we observe the letter and ignore the spirit or whether we observe both the letter and the spirit in equal measure. The words of the lexicon are the same, but they give rise to different styles of composition with different authors. The tunes and the notes are the same, but they give rise to different music with different singers. The colours and the brushes are the same, but they are rendered into different pictures by different painters. So it is with a constitution. It depends upon how we work.... ‡...When all is said and done, we must realize how much we owe to the half a dozen men that have fashioned this Constitution and given it a shape and form. Our friend, Dr. Ambedkar, has gone away, else I should have liked to tell him what a steam-roller intellect he brought to bear upon this magnificent and tremendous task : irresistible, indomitable, unconquerable, levelling, down tall palms and short poppies : whatever he felt to be right he stood by, regardless of consequences. Then there was Sir Alladi, with his oceanic depths of learning, and a whole knowledge of the Constitutional Law of the world on his finger tips. He has made great contribution towards the drawing up of this *CAD, Official Report, Vol. X, 25th November 1949, p. 942-943. †Ibid., p. 945. ‡Ibid, pp. 946-947. 1202 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES