Vol. 17, Part III · pages 351–355

93 I WAS FAR AHEAD OF ... PATRIOTS OF INDIA On Sunday the 24th September 1944 a meeting of the ‘Untouchables’ was held in Memorial Hall, Park Town, Madras under the Chairmanship of Rao Bahadur N. Shivraj. On arrival Dr. B.R. Ambedkar was greeted with thunderous clapping. In the meeting (1) Madras Adi Dravid Workers Association, (2) South Indian Buddhist Association, (3) Scheduled Castes Federation of the Civil and Military Station Bangalore, (4) Madras Scheduled Castes Students Association, (5) Andhra Provincial Scheduled Castes Welfare Association and other institutions presented Addresses to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. On this occasion a youth presented Dr. B.R. Ambedkar with a beautiful picture of the Lord Buddha which was drawn by himself.1 Replying to the Addresses presented to him, Dr. Ambedkar said :— “Let me begin my saying that in this city of Madras, I have heard two comments made by a very distinguished citizen of this city which have been very uncomplementary to me-the speeches recently made by the Rt. Hon’ble U. S. Shrinivas Shastri. Mr. Shastri on one occasion, when his mind was not perturbed by this issue of Pakistan and when he still regarded Mr. Gandhi as the embodiment of India’s soul, who alone in fulness can represent India at any international gathering, said that whatever might happen, the public of India should take a great deal of precaution to see that under no circumstances I had a place in any international conference. I was somewhat surprised to hear that kind of language from that old venerable politician. I was searching my heart in order to find out whether really in the whole of my public career which I am ready to admit is not so extensive as that of the Rt. Honourable Shastri was probably as glorious as that of his. Whether during the short span of my public life, I have done something so disgraceful that India would be ashamed to see me sitting at an international gathering. I do not wish to use any abusive language, for I could have very easily said that the Rt. Hon’ble Shastri was a “lap-dog” of the British 1 : Khairmode, Vol. P. 356.

323I WAS..................INDIA Government. He has been sitting on the lap of the British Government all this while and if he had achieved any notoriety and greatness either in India or outside, it was largely due to the fact that the British Government had been pleased to make him a “show boy.” I do not wish to say that what Mr. Shastri has said, is really croakings of an old crow sitting on a diseased bowel. What is that most of the Congressmen have been generally saying? The Scheduled Castes have been inimical to the general interests of the country, it was stated. I would like to say that I have sat side by side with the greatest men in this country viz. Mr. Gandhi, the Rt. Hon’ble Shastri, Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru, and I can enumerate a host of public men in India who undoubtedly occupy the first place and rank in India’s politics. I have watched him doing what a Nationalist can be expected to do, and I am confident, not only confident but proud that whenever any public question came up at the Round Table Conference, I was far ahead of the gentlemen who are supposed to be the patriots of India (cheers). Gandhi’s Doings at R. T. C. Most people assembled here do not know the doings of Mr. Gandhi at the R.T.C. You all think that the parts we played there were glorious ones. Is that the true story? What did Mr. Gandhi do? You all know that in 1931 when Gandhi attended the R.T.C. a mandate was imposed upon him that he should ask for Independence and that India should not accept anything less than Independence, something which was undoubtedly beyond the many super politicians in India were prepared to ask. What did he do? It is regrettable to state and I think in view of the fact that I am so invariably accused of having played the part of a “black leg” at the R.T.C. I must state the story, you will be surprised to hear what I may tell you. This old amiable gentleman who went to the R.T.C. with a mandate to demand nothing short of Independence, what did he do ? He said to Sir Samuel Hoare, the then Secretary of State, that he was quite prepared at this stage to be content with Provincial Autonomy, a most extraordinary thing. Those of us who do not belong to the Congress, on the other side, had taken up a stand that whether in 1931. India was

324 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES ripe or prepared for Dominion Status or not, the Indian people would insist in all circumstances to have at least some share of responsibility at the centre. Indians would never agree to be content with merely Provinical Autonomy but they would insist upon some introduction of responsibility at the centre. The old gentleman was of course expected to go much beyond that, as his mandate was Independence. Curiously, unfortunately and fatally for this country, the old gentleman was so manouvered that he was made to agree that in the circumstances of 1931, he was prepared to be content with and accept the recommendations by the Simon Commission. Gentlemen, who rescued the situation? Sir Samuel Hoare, the then Secretary of State, and the Conservative Party which was in office, were very anxious to close down the R.T.C. A great point was that we had appointed a Tripartite Commission, representing the three Parties in the Parliament, the Liberal, Labour and Conservative Parties. Sir Samuel Hoare looked upon it as a point of honour that Parliament should stand by the recommendations of Simon Commission and should not proceed beyond what they had recommended. Mr. Gandhi’s attitude was God-sent interference. The argument presented by Sir Samuel Hoare that if Mr. Gandhi is not the greatest-man in India, who was greater than him ? Who is Sapru, who is Dr. Ambedkar and who is Jinnah ? If Mr. Gandhi is content with Provincial Autonomy, the whole show should be closed down and the Conference shut up and the Parliament should be proud to frame a bill in terms of the Simon Commission. I was one of those who protested against that kind of thing. We said such a thing we can never have and we can never be a party to it, we raised so much disturbance that the British Cabinet was obliged to appoint a small Cabinet Committee in order to take evidence as to what the real sense of the Representatives of the R.T.C. was. Representations were invited in order to test the case and I was one of the patient men who were called upon to give evidence before the Cabinet Committee. It was presided over by the Lord Chancellor, the Prime Minister and the Secretary were the other two members. I like to say and I am proud of the fact that I was one of those who told the Committee of the Cabinet that even the Depressed Classes will not tolerate the Parliament going back. Is

325I WAS..................INDIA that an ignorable part that one can say I have played? Can it be said that the Scheduled Castes stood against responsibility at the centre ? Let me tell you another instance. We have got innumerable Native States in this country, really 1/3 of our population lives under the rule of the Indian Princes, where there is no law, where everything is done at the personal authority and at personal whims of Princes. It was one of the decisions at the R.T.C. that the Indian States should be brought in as one of the elements in the All-India Federation. The great issue was whether the representations of the Indian States should be elected by the people themselves or whether the representatives of Indian States should be nominated by the Princes. It was one of the greatest issues over which a long controversy was going on for good many days. Probably, some of you may be under the impression that on an issue like this, so important, so vital, and I may say, so dear to Mr. Gandhi in his own terms, what was the attitude of Mr. Gandhi on this point? You will be surprised to hear that Mr. Gandhi bodily went over to the Princes nominating representatives of the States to the Conference. It was I alone, a single individual member of the R.T.C. who fought from the very beginning to the end over this issue (cheers). Even Rt. Hon’ble Shastri—I may tell you very funny stories about this old gentleman—(voices : we shall be glad to hear them). We were all very much opposed to Federation. It was one of the important points which I maintained from the beginning to the end that the politics of British India should not be mixed up with the politics of Indian States. British India has been separated from Indian India, particularly for over 150 years. No doubt, we have common destiny. Nonetheless, the fact remains that we in British India have travelled a different road. The Indian States have been going along a different road. We have got different sort of political education which they have not. Problem of Indian States We have inherited different political traditions, and therefore I was all along insisting that British India should be permitted to travel on her road for political emancipation rather than have her destiny mixed up complicated by the introduction of Indian States. Rt. Hon’ble Shastri was one of our colleagues, or

326 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES “conspirators”. We were only three, Sir Chintamani, Shrinivas Shastri and myself who hugged only hearts with the British India. We had put him—(Shastri) up our Champion, being a glorious man who can command greater respect than a youngster one like me. A day before when he was to speak at the Plenary Session, I and Chintamani took him to lunch to know whether he was still sour. We found that he was. We walked from Jenny street to King James Palace when at 3 O’ clock Rt. Hon’ble was scheduled to speak. My friends ! What did he say ? He got up and said, “My dear Prime Minister, I am a Champion”. My heart and Sir Chintamani’s were strong enough, otherwise we should have died of heart failure. Mr. Shastri said that he was in favour of Federation and he was running after me telling me that I was a strong patriot and I was up-turning our apple cans, why don’t you keep quiet ? If Mr. Gandhi was sincere and if the cause of the people of Indian States was dearer to him, it was necessary that they should be emancipated from the tyranny and oppression of personal rule of the Princes. He was the first man who ought to have said that representation should be made by elections. Mr. Gandhi instead said, he was in favour of the Princes nominating their representatives. I may tell you one thing. There is one thing, I know that Mr. Gandhi knows very little of politics, (Laughter), I am not saying this in any carping spirit. I am not passing any judgement over him nor to receive cheap applause. But I know it is fact. What happened is this, I was present at the First R.T.C. Mr. Gandhi was not obvious I knew many things and snags, I knew what strategy and tactics different parties were adopting and I was very anxious that before Mr. Gandhi opened his mouth he should be warned about the land of lies, so that he may know what he should say and what he should not. At the second R.T.C. when Mr. Gandhi came I was also a member of Federal Structure Committee. Of course being a representative of the Scheduled Castes, I could not expect to have the first place by the side of the Lord Chancellor who presided (Laughter). Giving the order of names of persons, I sat somewhere in the last. Obviously, when Mr. Gandhi came on the first day, an agenda was placed before us for discussion. I was very much worried by the fact that having regard to Mr. Gandhi’s immaturity