Presidential Address to the Indian National Congress, Bombay

[p. 915] BROTHERS and Sisters,—We are meeting after three years and a half of strenuous work and suffering. The country has had the misfortune of losing the guidance and mature judgment of a veteran worker like Dr. Annie Besant, whose life and work have been a source of inspiration to thousands. It has further had the misfortune of losing another veteran patriot in Sir Shankaran Nair and a valiant nationalist in Mr. Syed Hasan Imam, who, 16 years ago, guided the deliberations of a special session of the Congress in this very city. The passing away of that uncompromising champion of our liberties whether in or out of the Speaker's chair, Vithalbhai Patel leaves a gap, which will be well-nigh impossible to fill. To many of us, the premature death of Deshpriya Jatindra Mohan Sen Gupta was a personal calamity. In Mr. A. Rangaswamy Iyengar the country has lost not only a distinguished journalist but also a constitutional lawyer, whose knowledge was frequently requisitioned.

Let me also remind you of the one, who is behind prison bars and who represents more than any one else the flower of the youth of our country and whose ardent spirit is undaunted by national set-backs or domestic anxieties. To Jawaharlal Nehru, our heartiest greetings and sympathy. Our thought also must go to the sturdy fighter, Subhas Chandra Bose, now in a foreign land. Nor may we forget all those who, though unknown, have suffered or are still suffering for the sake of the country.

To those servants of the nation, known and unknown, who have passed away, we offer our homage.

[p. 916] You have called me to preside over the Congress at a very difficult and critical time. It will be natural on your part to expect me to carry on the national work till the next session of the Congress.

I confess, I feel overwhelmed by the tremendous responsibility that the position carries with it. I would have been happy to be left alone to work in my own humble way in my corner of the country, but the nation's call may not be disobeyed and I am here at your service. I am fully conscious of my limitations, and I have sense enough to know that this signal mark of confidence is not meant as a personal tribute, but is only a token of appreciation of the little contribution that my poor province has been able to make during the recent struggle and of the sympathy which it has been its good fortune to receive in such ample measure in its recent unprecedented calamity. It rests, however, with you to help me by your unstinted support and co-operation to carry on the difficult duties you have entrusted to me.

Coming as I do from a province which, during the last ten months or so, has been particularly selected as the victim of Nature's wrath, I desire to convey my heartfelt thanks to the country, which has shown practical sympathy with the people stricken by phenomenal earthquake followed by huge floods. The response, which has come from all quarters and from all classes of people, inhabiting this vast country and from Indians abroad, and from foreigners shows conclusively that if the disaster was unprecedented in its magnitude, the sympathy and fellow-feeling it evoked, was equally unparalleled. There have been disasters in the past, which though not so vast in extent, were still some of the greatest recorded in history, and yet the country was never before roused to such a pitch of active sympathy. As the national feeling has grown and pervaded the country at large, the wail of people in a corner of Northern India has re-sounded and re-echoed from one end to the other and drawn out not only cash but tears and personal service. As the Bihar Central Relief Committee said in one of its early statements: "Out of the [p. 917] great tragedy that has overwhelmed Bihar and taken its heavy toll of death and destruction and sorrow, some enduring good has come in the shape of a united nation joined together in common sorrow and common effort to overcome it, having faith in each other and forgetting the petty differences that seemed too trivial in the face of a mighty disaster."

RECENT HISTORY

The Congress movement has passed through various phases during the last fifty years of its existence. One would feel tempted to take a bird's-eye view of its hope and aspirations, its weaknesses and failures, its successes and triumphs. But I would resist that temptation except in so far as its recent history may be necessary to elucidate the present and enable us to lay out a programme for the future.

It will be recalled that the last regular session of the Congress was held at Karachi in March 1931, soon after the Gandhi-Irwin Pact. It was much to be hoped that that Pact would open a way to permanent peace between Britain and India, but that was not to be. Now that Civil Disobedience has been suspended, it would be useless to go into a detailed examination of the circumstances which forced the hands of the Congress to re-start Civil Disobedience after Mahatma Gandhi's return from the Second Round Table Conference. I would content myself by stating that at every step the object of the authors of the Pact was frustrated by the officials who were in charge of affairs and had to give effect to its provisions. Lord Irwin had retired. Lord Willingdon had come in and there was undisguised resentment in official circles at what was regarded as a surrender on the part of Lord Irwin. And the moment he was away from the scene, a complete change in the Government policy came about and preparations were set afoot to take the Congress by surprise as soon as the Round Table Conference was over. It was known the Government could not afford, and did not intend, to accept the demands of the Congress. Events in England also proved favourable to this scheme of things.

[p. 918] The Labour Government had resigned. The National Government with a big Conservative majority was formed and the whole policy of Lord Irwin and Mr. Wedgwood Benn was reversed. When Mahatma Gandhi returned from England, he found himself faced with a situation which seemed to have been very carefully and meticulously prepared. An excuse was found in what was wrongly described and advertised as a No-Rent Campaign in the United Provinces, but which was really nothing more than suspension of payment pending negotiations, which had been going on between the Government on the one side and the Congress leaders on the other, to secure a settlement on an equitable basis on the very serious question of remission or suspension of rent on purely economic grounds, which had become necessary on account of unprecedented economic depression. Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, Mr. Sherwani and Mr. Tandon were arrested just two days before Mahatma Gandhi's arrival and Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan with some of his colleagues was made a prisoner under an old Regulation. Bengal had already been selected for special treatment and a number of most drastic Ordinances had been promulgated. They were followed by equally drastic Ordinances for the United Provinces and the Frontier. On his voyage, Mahatma Gandhi had been issuing statements offering co-operation but on landing he came to know of the removal, by arrest and imprisonment, of valued colleagues and the promulgation of the Ordinances in the United Provinces and the Frontier; yet he offered, on behalf of the Working Committee, to intervene and, if possible, to bring about a settlement and applied to the Viceroy for an interview, which was unceremoniously rejected except under condition that the questions relating to Bengal, the U. P. and the Frontier would not be subjects of discussion. The interview having been rejected, Mahatma Gandhi had no option but to advise the Working Committee to be prepared for the revival of Civil Disobedience. But he made a last moment attempt and sent a second long telegram begging again for an unconditional interview, failing which, he thought it his [p. 919] duty to inform the Viceroy that the Working Committee would have to resort to Civil Disobedience. Reply came to this last moment request in the form of warrants of arrest for himself, the Congress President, Sardar Vallabhai Patel, and other prominent Congressmen throughout the country.

The Congress was taken unawares and the Government expected that they would be able to crush the whole movement within a fortnight. In spite of want of preparation, in spite of sudden removal of all the prominent Congress workers throughout the country within a few days to prison, when they were not able to give instructions to their followers as to how to organise the campaign, it must be said to the credit of the nation that the lead, which had been given by the Working Committee, was faithfully and spontaneously followed. Thousands again courted imprisonment, lathi charges, firings, heavy fines, confiscation of property, and beatings on an extensive scale.

The movement was not crushed and went on for months and months without a break to the bewilderment of officials, who had hoped to crush it in a few days. Special sessions of the Congress were held at Delhi and at Calcutta amidst arrest and lathi charges and in spite of the vigilance of the police, who had concentrated upon preventing them. It is unnecessary to go into details of this repression beyond stating that a bare summary of the provisions of the various Ordinances, most of which were later converted into Acts by obliging Legislatures, will show how drastic they were in character and comprehensive in scope. The courts were ousted from jurisdiction and the Executive armed with large powers. The press was muzzled. New offences were created and in some cases collective and vicarious punishments laid down. To these must be added numerous laws enacted for Bengal particularly, apparently to meet what is described as the terrorist menace, but resulting not in a few cases in a complete suspension of all political activities of a progressive type, lest their sponsors should incur the wrath and the penalty of the all powerful C. I. D. Now, the Congress has never concealed [p. 920] its view regarding the terrorist movement. It has condemned without hesitation and in an unequivocal language all terrorist outrages, and under the great influence of Mahatma Gandhi has done all it could to create an atmosphere against the cult of terrorism. But at every step, it has felt hampered by the fact that impatient enthusiasts who take to this wrong method, cannot effectively be approached by public opinion on account of the stiffness of the Government attitude and its all-pervading blasting suspicion of the motives of even those, who are its supporters and helpers in this respect. Apart from other considerations, the Congress condemns terrorism, because it hampers the country's progress and tends to create forces which will lead to further disruption and trouble and because it is essentially wrong and un-Indian. But these young men cannot be weaned from it by the equally indefensible method of unadulterated repression.

The country has been passing through a period of deep economic depression, which has been intensified by the Government policy of managing Indian affairs in the interests not of India but of Great Britain. The past few years have seen great distress of the peasantry unable to pay the heavy land revenue and rent and suffering great privations. They have witnessed curtailment of expenditure on nation-building departments, great slump in industry, export of more than 200 crores of distress gold, dislocation of trade and a tremendous increase in unemployment the extent of which even in the best of normal years, the British Government have never dared to ascertain owing to its vastness. These years have been remarkable for heavy additions to the so-called Public Debt of India and the burdens of the already overtaxed taxpayer and the poverty-stricken population for carrying on an extravagant and top-heavy administration and partly for suppressing and crushing the movement for freedom.

The Ottawa Pact, which has been condemned with one voice by the best-informed opinion in the country as being detrimental to the best interests of India, and [p. 921] particularly of the masses of agriculturists, was ratified. Its working has proved that the apprehensions of its critics were well founded. It has successfully tied India to the chariot wheels of the British policy of Imperial preference.

INDIANS ABROAD

The position of our countrymen abroad gives no ground for satisfaction. Their treatment in the colonies of the British Empire has been a long-standing cause of just grievance and has influenced not a little the change in our outlook and opinion in favour of complete independence. One after another, Indians settled in these colonies and protectorates are being deprived of their inherent rights to which they are entitled by virtue of their long association, service and contribution to the prosperity of these colonies. They have, in fact, been instrumental in many cases in building up these colonies and many have been born in them and have their homes without any other in the world. One scheme after another is devised to get rid of them after they are no more needed, and although it is some consolation to know that the scheme of assisted repatriation has been given up, it is also to be noted that no place is found in the vast British Empire where they can live and settle with the same full rights to land and citizenship as others have in India. The latest application of this policy of squeezing out Indians is reported from Zanzibar where, in spite of the best of relations which Indians have maintained for generations with the Sultan and his subjects, Ordinances have been hurriedly passed, which deprive them of the rights of acquiring land. The discrimination against Indians becomes flagrant when we know that this restriction does not extend to the new arrivals from Arabia. There is nothing surprising in all this when we know that Indians do not enjoy even elementary rights of citizenship in their own country and which even the proposed constitutional reforms are not going to confer on them. We can only give this assurance to our countrymen abroad that as our position at home improves, their position will also automatically improve. In this connection it is [p. 922] impossible not to mention with gratitude the great name of Deenabandhu C. F. Andrews, who has been frequently going to Africa to render such help as has been possible for him to render.

THE DUAL POLICY

The Government policy, which was enunciated by Lord Irwin towards the end of 1929 announcing the convening of the Round Table Conference has always had a double aspect which has been emphasised more than once by Lord Willingdon's Government. It has been claimed by the Government that this double policy, on the one hand, aims at advancing constitutional reforms, and on the other, seek to suppress what the Government considers to be subversive and revolutionary movements. In pursuance of the first, it is claimed that the Round Table Conference has been framed as a result of consultation with Indians and that a Joint Parliamentary Committee is considering them. These proposals are known as the White Paper. In pursuance of the second, the Government has thought it necessary to suppress the Civil Disobedience movement with a heavy hand. To Indians it seems that the second policy has not only been much more in evidence and has caused untold suffering to numberless people, but is responsible for the issuing of Ordinances and the enactment of laws which have taken away even the ordinary rights of citizenship and laid down drastic penalties and suppressed not only what may be regarded as subversive movements, but effectively prevented perfectly constitutional agitation also. The reform side of the policy has succeeded only in feeding credulous people on hopes of something which may not come. We have, undoubtedly, had three Round Table Conferences, Committees and Sub-Committees ad infinitum and prolonged inquiry by a Joint Parliamentary Committee. It has dragged on in some form or other its interminable investigations for six or seven long years. It is yet to be seen if this long labour is going to produce anything acceptable even to the most moderate opinion in the country.

[p. 923] THE WHITE PAPER—FOUR TESTS

The White Paper has been condemned by almost unanimous public opinion in India as highly disappointing and unsatisfactory. And, of course, it does not in any way fulfil the requirements of the Congress, which has declared for independence meaning and including complete control over the Army, the Finances, the Foreign relations and the internal administration of the country. The White Paper is nothing if it is not a negation of all these items and if it does not bar even a gradual progress towards any of them. In view of the fact that very serious efforts are being made in England to whittle down even the White Paper proposals and that even Mr. Arthur Henderson, the leader of the Labour Party, is unable to concede anything in the nature of even diluted self-determination to India, it may seem out of place for me to devote any time to its detailed criticism. But inasmuch as the White Paper proposals are the result of long and expensive consultations and are undergoing detailed examination by the Joint Parliamentary Committee and have been put forward in justification of the Government policy of advancing constitutional reforms, I take leave to point out that the proposals of the White Paper do not take us anywhere near what our moderate countrymen aim at, viz., Dominion Status, not to speak of complete independence which is the Congress goal. In fact, they take the country in some respects in the opposite direction and leave it in a position constitutionally worse than that now occupied under the Montagu-Chelmsford Reforms.

I will judge the White Paper proposals in the light of four tests, namely, (1) how far the proposed new legislatures will be representative of the nation; (2) how far the powers alleged to be transferred to popular control are real in the Centre and the Provinces; (3) what the Powers proposed to be transferred in regard to the Finances are, and what additional burdens India will have to bear for the New Constitution; and (4) whether the proposed Constitution contains within itself any elements of growth and development.

[p. 924] COMPOSITION OF FEDERAL LEGISLATURE

It is sought to replace the bloc of officials and non-officials nominated by the Government by nominees of Indian States, joining the Federation. The nominated officials and non-officials of British India cannot be said to be amenable to popular opinion but they have certainly a wider outlook and are more in contact with public opinion than any nominee of a State could be. They also feel a sense of responsibility even though it is to the British Government and not to the people of India. Will the State nominees have any information about or acquaintance with events happening in British India from which the States have been in a way kept segregated? The only effect of the replacement of the nominated bloc by States' nominees will be a tightening of the British control coupled with traditions of a mere autocratic rule and greater disregard of popular wishes than we are accustomed to in British India and which these nominees will bring with themselves. But apart from its bearing the character of a nominated bloc, it will also be a larger bloc numerically. Under the Montagu Reforms, out of 145 members of the Assembly, 40 or 27·5 per cent. are nominated if we exclude the member for Berar who for practical purposes is an elected member; under the White Paper proposals, out of a House of 375, no less than 125 or 33·3 per cent. are nominated by the States—an increase in the nominated element of 6 per cent. When we look at the composition of the elected element in the Federal Assembly, we find that separate electorates have not only been retained but considerably extended and the number of those generally expected to side with the British and the Governor-General considerably increased. I believe, in the place of 41 out of 104 or 39 per cent. being returned by separate electorates under the existing Constitution, we shall have 108 out of 250 or 43 per cent. returned by separate electorate under the White Paper scheme. Thus, there can be hardly any doubt that the White Paper Federal Assembly will be a less progressive and more autocratically inclined body than the present Assembly. It is [p. 925] unnecessary to go into the Constitution of the Second Chamber which is bound to be less progressive than the popular house. In a joint session which is provided for, the nominated element will be as much as 235 out of 636 or 37 per cent. and a motion of no-confidence in connection with a subject relating to British India against a British Indian Minister can never secure a two-thirds majority if the State nominees chose to maintain the Ministry.

In the provinces the nominated bloc is done away with, but several provinces like Bengal, Bihar and Orissa and the United Provinces are going to be saddled in its place with a Second Chamber, and if the trend of opinion as it is developing in England gives any indication, other provinces are probably going to follow suit under the advice of the Joint Parliamentary Committee. Whatever justification there may be for a Second Chamber in the Federal Legislature, there is none whatever for it in a subordinate legislature like that of the provinces. Besides, there is no justification for the extra expenditure involved in setting up and maintaining these Second Chambers. Nor does the experience of the working of the Montford Reforms lend any support in their favour even in the provinces, which may be said to be radical or very progressive.

POWERS CLAIMED TO BE TRANSFERRED

Now, no Constitution can be said to confer Self-Government or Responsible Government or Dominion Status, much less complete independence, which reserves to the Governor-General and refuses to transfer to Ministers under the control of a popular legislature, the administration of Defence, Foreign Affairs and Ecclesiastical Departments. But leaving this alone, which the White Paper frankly reserves, let us consider the Departments it professes to transfer. In regard to these also, it is clearly laid down that the Governor-General will not be guided by the advice of Ministers, if so to be guided would infringe on what are called the Reserve Departments, his special [p. 926] responsibilities and I may add also his discretionary powers. These are couched in such general terms that there are hardly any measure which the Governor-General could not hold up or prevent, if he considered it necessary to do so, in his wisdom, which will be the final arbiter in the matter. These special responsibilities are so vague and widespread that they may be said to pervade all departments.

It is not inconceivable that the most innocent action taken by a Minister not in favour with the Governor-General or the Governor and in this respect the powers of both are identical for all practical purposes within their respective spheres could easily be regarded as infringing upon his special responsibility in respect of one or other of the seven heads into which it is divided. The much advertised autonomy of the Provinces really gives more autonomy to the Governor than to the people or the Minister and enables the Governor-General to have his orders executed in spite of the Ministers even when they may happen to deal with a matter falling within the scope of the latter if only the Governor or the Governor-General decides that it infringes on the special responsibility of the one or the other.

Special responsibilities are laid down under seven heads for the Governor-General. They are: (1) the prevention of grave menace to the peace or tranquillity of India or any part thereof; (2) the safeguarding of the financial responsibility and credit of the Federation; (3) the safeguarding of the legitimate interests of minorities; (4) the securing to the members of the Public Services of any right provided for them by the Constitution Act and the safeguarding of their legitimate rights; (5) the prevention of Commercial discrimination; (6) the protection of the rights of Indian States; and (7) any matter which affects the administration of any department under the direction and control of the Governor-General, the Governor-General being empowered in each case to determine whether any special responsibility is involved in any given circumstance. The same powers are given [p. 927] mutatis mutandis to the Governor in so far as they are applicable to provinces. The first practically takes away with one hand what it purports to give with the other; law and order though said to be transferred in the provinces are thus kept quite safe within the double lock of special responsibility of the Governor-General and the Governor. The elasticity of this phrase is quite well known in this country and I am using no language of exaggeration if I say that it is mere camouflage and a fraud to say that law and order are being transferred when the special responsibility in this respect is reserved in the wide and all-pervasive terms as is done under the White Paper proposal.

As regards the second, admittedly, definition of this responsibility is drawn in wide terms and enables the Governor-General to step in whenever any proposal of the Minister regarding budgeting or borrowing is considered by him as prejudicing or endangering India's credit in the money market of the world. Past experience has shown that financial stability and credit of India are synonymous with British profit at the expense of India, and British interests have been served so often and so brazen-facedly in the name of India's stability and credit that no Indian is likely to be deceived by words which connote more than their ordinary dictionary meaning. The entire currency and exchange policy of the Government is said to be dictated by these considerations and we know it to our cost how a stroke of the pen or an apparently innocent notification of the Government has the effect of transferring crores from the hands of Indians to those of the British without the former realising it.

The third will, of course, come very handy in turning many an awkward corner. Our Muslim brethren and others who are in a minority are apt to run away with the idea that the British Government is reserving special responsibility to safeguard their interest. Really speaking, if there is anything more calculated than another to keep all the communities warring with each other, it is this. Besides, it is a delusion to think that the safeguards are devised to serve any of the Indian minorities. They will [p. 928] find in actual working that after all, in all matters of moment, it is not they who are meant but the small microscopic minority of those birds of passage who come from thousands of miles and make hay while the sun shines and then disappear in the evening of their days to enjoy the fruits in their native land again.

The fourth destroys whatever is yet left of autonomy. We shall indeed be masters in our own house without having the power to order our servants about, to whom we shall be bound to pay their unbearably high salaries, guarantee their pensions and leaves and promotion and what not. It will be easy enough for these so-called Civil Servants to set at naught not only the policy, decisions and orders of their so-called superiors the Ministers, but to create deadlocks which will be set down to the discredit of Indians who will be branded as incompetent and inexperienced Ministers to whom it was a mistake, it will be said, to transfer powers.

In the name of preventing Commercial discrimination against the British, it is really ensured that the Indian should be discriminated against in the future as he has been in the past. It must be the experience of all businessmen who have anything to do with the Government and they cannot move an inch without coming across the Government in some form or another, how at every step they have to face situations which a Britisher there has not to face. Go to the coal fields. They will tell you how it is difficult for an Indian colliery owner to get a railway siding to his colliery, how it is difficult for him to get wagons, and how the Indian is every day discriminated against in practice. I am not mentioning how it has been possible for a few British concerns to get leases of practically the whole area with the best seams of coal and how Indians have to be content with second and third class collieries and even these they get with difficulty. I am not forgetting that colliery lands are largely owned by Indians. We know how these things are managed, specially when the owner happens to be a ward of court. The manipulation of railway freights offers an easy handle. When [p. 929] I was looking after the affairs of the All-India Spinners' Association in my province, I calculated some years ago that the cost of transport of cotton from Sewan (in the district of Saran where cotton is largely grown) to Madhubani in the district of Darbhanga where we produce our best and largest quantity of Khadi, both the districts being within the same division of Tirhut under a Commissioner, was the same as that of transporting cotton from Bombay to Japan and bringing back the cloth made of that cotton to Bombay. I do not know if there has been a change in this respect recently. Similarly, I was told that the cost of transporting coal from South Africa to Indian cotton mills was the same as that of transporting it from the coal fields of Bihar to the same mills. I am mentioning these few illustrations and they can be multiplied to show how in the past the whole policy of the Government of India has been regulated with an eye not to the benefit of Indians but of foreigners, and if by any chance any Minister has the temerity to try to be just, he will at once be held up as discriminating against the Britisher, and the Governor-General or the Governor will have no difficulty in invoking his special responsibility for perpetuating the injustice.

As regards the Indian States, we have already had illustrations how activities of their subjects in favour of constitutional reforms can be throttled and the special responsibility of the Governor-General or the Governor in this respect will be used for preventing the virus of democracy from spreading into these States.

So much for special responsibilities. The discretionary powers of the Governor-General and the Governors are of a most drastic kind. Under the existing Constitution, the Governor has the power of certification and veto, but under the proposal embodied in the White Paper, he can also send message to the legislature not to proceed with a certain measure of legislation as also to proceed in a certain way; not to pass certain laws as also to pass certain others or that a particular measure must be passed by a particular date and in the event of the legislature refusing or failing [p. 930] to obey his command, it will become a Governor-General's or Governor's Act which will have the force of an Act of legislature without having the odium attached to the name of "ordinance" and without the fetters of a limited duration, which an ordinance has. These proposals place India under a virtual dictatorship. Mr. Churchill described the position admirably in another context:

The Viceroy or Governor-General was armed with all the powers of a Hitler or a Mussolini. By a stroke of pen, he could scatter the Constitution and decree any law to be passed or martial law, which was no law at all. Of all these he was the sole judge. Such a functionary was a dictator and he had a very powerful army.

All this power is given not only to the Governor-General, but even to Provincial Governors who are, for the first time, to be invested with powers to pass ordinances and Governor's Acts and all other powers within their spheres which the Governor-General possesses in respect of the country as a whole.

The White Paper proposals further take away certain powers which are now possessed by the Assembly in however attenuated a form they may be. Thus, a discussion of the Railway budget used to furnish an opportunity for the ventilation of grievance in connection with railway administration. Railways could now be discussed and voted upon by the Central Legislature, but the creation of the proposed statutory railway authority would have the effect of precluding the future Government and Legislature from making any effective criticism of any matter transferred to the statutory authority. That this is not a negligible matter is apparent from the fact that the Railways have some 800 crores invested in them and are very largely national concerns already and where they are not so, they are soon passing into the hands of the State.

FINANCE

When we come to consider the question of finance, the illusory nature of the so-called reforms becomes still more apparent. It has been calculated that 80 per cent. of the [p. 931] Central revenue in the Central Government will be eaten up by Army expenditure, Debt service, guaranteed pays, pensions and allowances, which will be outside the vote of the Assembly, and the remaining 20 per cent. with which alone the Minister, supposed to be responsible to the Legislature, could play, would be subject to a vote of the upper chamber which could bring it before a joint session of both Chambers for final determination. Further, if the Governor-General regards the demand for grants by the Minister under any head inadequate for the discharge of his special responsibility, he may include any additional amount which he regards necessary for the discharge of such special responsibility, and the legislature will not be at liberty to vote on the same. Thus it is apparent that the control of the Ministry over the public purse is practically nil in the Centre.

Considering the proposals from the point of view of the burden they impose on the country, it has been said on high authority that the introduction of provincial autonomy will involve an annual expenditure of 6½ to 8 crores and that of responsibility in the Centre another 2 crores every year. In a country which is admittedly the poorest in the world, where the cost of administration is top heavy and certainly out of all proportion to the income per capita of the population under it, any addition to the already unbearable burden cannot but be regarded with the greatest misgiving, and no responsible person can easily reconcile himself to this additional burden as a price for reforms so illusory, so retrograde, and so calculated to perpetuate and tighten the strangle-hold on the country.

FUTURE IN THE AIR

There is no provision for any automatic growth or development in the Constitution. Everything does and will continue to depend on the sweet will and pleasure of the British Parliament. There is no pretence at self-determination and even the Federation, which is to come after fulfilment of so many conditions precedent, can come only after a second vote of the Houses of Parliament.

[p. 932] And what is this federation? It is a kind of federation which has no parallel in history. In it the rulers of one-third of India will be called in to counteract through their nominees the progressive elected elements of the remaining two-thirds. There is absolutely no mutuality in any respect, the princes' nominees will have equal rights with the elected representatives of British India to interfere with the administration of British India without British Indian representatives having any the least voice in the administration of the States, which will continue their autocratic rule without so much as even declaring or guaranteeing the elementary, fundamental rights of citizenship, which are or rather ought to be the basis and foundation of any allegiance which the people may be required to bear to the State. In other words, it will be a kind of federation in which unabashed autocracy will sit entrenched in one-third of India and peep in every now and then to strangle popular will in the remaining two-thirds. But the princes themselves will be more helpless than they are now and will soon realise the effect of a federation which is conceived to keep them free from the baneful interference of British India people but nonetheless subservient to the Viceroy.

SUSPENSION OF CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE— COUNCIL PROGRAMME

I have thus far discussed the dual policy of Government. I come now to our own policies and plans. Events have somehow so happened that since the breach of the Truce in 1932, we have had to steer our course clear of Government policies. The suspension of the Civil Disobedience movement was declared not with reference to any declaration of policy by Government, but with reference to the peculiar moral and spiritual character of our struggle.

I will not go into the events that led up to the historic Patna decision of May 1934—how Gandhiji successfully challenged from jail the Communal Award of the Premier which had threatened to vivisect the Hindu community [p. 933] in twain, how Gandhiji intensified the movement for the abolition of untouchability and his epic fast as part of it, and his release, the Poona Conference and how as a result of things he had heard and seen during the great Harijan tour he came to recommend to the A. I. C. C. suspension of the Civil Disobedience and confining it to himself. Let the country study the course of events in the statements Gandhiji has issued from time to time.

Some of the factors which must have weighed with Gandhiji when he recommended suspension of Civil Disobedience as a mass movement could not have escaped the notice of even casual observers. Two weaknesses seem to me to have dogged our footsteps.

Firstly, the Congress workers had been gradually and perhaps unconsciously led into adoption of methods of secrecy, which reduced what would have been an open battle of defiance into a battle of wits. It was not realised that Satyagraha is essentially a fight on a higher moral plane in which suffering is openly courted and cheerfully borne and which aims at conquering the opponent by an appeal to his moral sense and in which any attempt to over-reach him rebounds with fatal effect on the Satyagrahi himself.

Secondly, it must be also admitted that the attack of the Government on a vulnerable point succeeded. People were not prepared to lose property to the extent they were prepared to lose liberty and even life, and when heavy fines and sequestration of property in lieu of fines and confiscations started on a wholesale scale, gradually demoralisation set in and ultimately broke the backbone of the movement. Attempt was made to continue the struggle by confining it to those individuals who had faith in it, and taking it out of the methods of secrecy. That partly explains the Poona and Patna decisions.

It has had to be suspended in the very interests of the movement and those of the country. The principal reason was our own weakness, and yet I do not feel that [p. 934] there is any reason to be down-hearted. Our object is nothing less than the liberation of a vast country which is as big as a Continent, with its varied population of many castes and creeds and speaking different languages. The response which the country has made from one end to the other to the call of the Congress, has been splendid and we have reason to be proud of it. Because our object is great and the task difficult and tremendous we have to consider our own shortcomings and defects of the Working Committee and the All-India Congress Committee and certain announcements which Mahatma Gandhi has made have been subjected to very searching criticism. The value and importance of these resolutions and the statements of Mahatmaji consist in the fact that they have brought in the forefront of discussion certain fundamental considerations. The first statement which Mahatmaji issued from Patna on the 7th April last, simultaneously with his correspondence with Dr. Ansari, announced his advice to the Congress and Congressmen to suspend Civil Disobedience except with regard to himself and to those who believed in entry into legislatures, to take up the programme of Council Entry. Both these items were considered at great length at a meeting of the All-India Congress Committee at Patna in the following May and were endorsed by it. The Council Entry programme naturally led to the creation of the Congress Parliamentary Board which has been entrusted with the work of organising, guiding and controlling propaganda in favour of election of Congressmen to the Assembly for the time being. Now, to-day we are in the midst of a campaign which has led to the formulation of the Congress policy in the legislatures in regard to the White Paper and the Government policy of ruthless repression on which all parties in it are agreed but also, unfortunately, on what has been called the Communal decision of the British Government on which all are not agreed. It will be recalled that after the Second Round Table Conference, the British Government announced its decision settling from its point of view the questions of communal representations in the legislatures under the [p. 935] reform constitution. The decision was given because the Indian members of the Round Table Conference were unable to arrive at an agreed settlement of the outstanding differences on the constitutional question amongst the various communities in India. It has created the unfortunate position that whilst we are unable to agree among ourselves, it is also impossible to accept this decision which is anti-national in many respects and is calculated to retard the progress of the country towards a common national outlook. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that some of the minorities particularly the Mussalmans are opposed to rejecting it or think in the main it safeguards their interests. The Working Committee had, therefore, to decide the question on which a large section of Hindus and Sikhs are on the one side and practically all Mussalmans, with a few leading exceptions, and perhaps members of some other minority communities are on the other, the former favouring the unqualified rejection of the decision and the latter equally strongly favouring its acceptance, until it was replaced by an agreed settlement. Under the circumstances, the Working Committee had no other alternative but to point out the unsatisfactory and anti-national nature of the decision hoping at the same time to be able in course of time to replace it by an agreed settlement, and to that end not to divert the attention of the country by creating an agitation in favour of either accepting or rejecting it.

MAHATMAJI'S STATEMENT

But events have marched quickly during the past few weeks, Mahatma Gandhi has just made two statements of far-reaching importance, in which he has recorded his reading of the history of the past fifteen years, placed his finger unerringly on the secret places of our heart and given us a warning for the future. Not even his worst critics have challenged his analysis and some have even gloated over the situation in an 'I told you so' spirit. It will be best for us and for our country if even at the end of these fifteen years of our struggle we realise the true situation. The first statement was in the nature of a challenge and a [p. 936] feeler, the second is the result of the country's reaction to the first. In the first he declared the things that he holds dearer than life itself—truth and non-violence and khadi, reform and revolution through conversion and not compulsion—and said as one section of the country was running away from these articles of faith and as the other was giving no effect to the allegiance to them which it professed from year to year there was nothing for it but for him to retire from the Congress. In the second statement he declares his conviction that his retirement is inescapable but as he retires in order to be of more service to the Congress and the country than heretofore, he has also suggested a reform in the Constitution which alone can save the Congress from disruption.

Now that leaders like Sardar Vallabhai Patel, Dr. Ansari and the Khan Brothers have given their hearty assent to the correctness of Gandhiji's decision, I do not think it necessary for me to take up your time discussing the pros and cons of the question of his retirement. I should certainly have done so if my own mind ran counter to the opinions of these colleagues, but I am in hearty agreement with them, though the mind and heart both boggle at the thought of his retirement. But I am steadied as soon as I remind myself that his decision proceeds out of the depth of his devotion to truth and non-violence and it must spur us on to further effort towards those ideals.

But though Mahatmaji has made up his mind not to seek the vote of the Congress on things that make up the warp and woof of his life, I would ask you not to dismiss those things without a thought, and would urge you to realise their implications and to give them some place at least in your programme and your policies. Though I do not claim to have the same living and active faith as Mahatma Gandhi in those things that he has taught some of us at least to hold dear, I must declare my creed and my conviction about them.

CONGRESS CREED

About the amendment in the creed, I would ask you only one question. Have we really understood by "peaceful [p. 937] and legitimate" anything but "truthful and non-violent" all these years? Has the world outside understood our creed differently? All the credit that we can take to-day and all the discredit that critics and our self-introspecting hearts pour upon us spring from the fact that we have kept that lofty creed as our ideal. The world should cease to watch our fight with interest if our creed meant anything less than it has meant all these years. Whatever the failure of our civil resistance to civilise our rulers, there is no gainsaying the fact that there should have been much more unashamed brutality than we have been the victims of, if there had not been this great creed proclaimed by us.

I next come to the yarn franchise and to the much discussed Khadi clause. I may say without being guilty of national vanity that there is no other Flag in the world which expresses in itself purer and loftier ideals. It rules out in one sweep the fourfold curse of modern humanity, viz., imperialism, militarism, capitalism and industrialism. The Spinning Wheel and Khadi are not only the living link between the classes and the masses, they are symbols of the country's determination to resist all forms of exploitation by non-violent means. They represent an era of purification of politics and private life. Remove the Khadi clause and you will snap the living link between the cities and the villages.

To my mind Truth, Non-Violence, and Khadi represent a triple force whereby we can achieve the whole of the Karachi programme and more. There is a section of our countrymen who without having achieved even what we pledged ourselves to do at Karachi insist on crying for more. Whilst I would have no objection to amplifying the Karachi programme and elucidating it wherever there may be any fear of a misunderstanding, I would say emphatically that we should do nothing that compromises by one iota the creed of non-violence. Whatever may be our failures, we have made rapid strides. Let us not by our impatience undo the work of the last fifteen years. My friends the Socialists, are keen on a [p. 938] more inspiring ideology and would hasten the elimination of all that stands for exploitation. I should like to tell them in all humility but with all the force at my command that there is no greater ideology than is expressed by the creed of truth and non-violence and the determination of the country not to eliminate the men that stand for exploitation but the forces that do so. Our quarrel is with the sin and not the sinner which we all are to a greater or less degree. Compulsion will react on us with redoubled force; conversion, however slow it may seem, will be the shortest cut and will mean a new contribution to history and civilisation.

REFORM OF CONSTITUTION

Having said this, I would say a word about the reform in the constitution that Mahatmaji has suggested in his second statement. He recommends that the size of the Congress should be considerably curtailed and the representation in the Congress should reflect its hold on the country as a whole. It has been suggested that to make the Congress an efficient deliberative body, the number of delegates should be reduced from 6,000 to 1,000 and each delegate should be regarded not as a representative of a set number of people living within a particular area but should be regarded as in fact he is a representative of the members on the Congress roll and give to those places and provinces proportionally larger representation in the Congress, that will have more members on their rolls and that have been more active in carrying out the Congress programme. Whether they, the members, represent the whole nation or not will depend upon the quantity and quality of service they render. The Congress influence and hold over the people have never depended upon the number on the actual register but they depend upon what it stands for and the sacrifice that the members have made for achieving the goal.

In conclusion, I would say that in considering Mahatmaji's statements you should remove from your minds any apprehension that you may have that he is going to retire from public life or that by not being [p. 939] physically connected with the Congress, his interest will cease or that his help will not be available. I have no such apprehension. I am sure his separation is intended to strengthen and help us and not in any way to weaken or hinder us. I feel that Mahatma Gandhi outside the Congress which does not whole-heartedly accept his programme will be more helpful to the country and the Congress than Mahatma Gandhi inside the Congress with the drag of a big unbelieving majority at his back. I do not, therefore, feel any shock over his impending separation. I do not minimise the effect of such a decision, if he comes to it, but I wish you to have faith in him and I have no doubt that all will be right, whether he decides to work from within or from outside the Congress.

CONCLUSION

Let us start with a clean slate on the work in front of us. The need of the hour is not for a bigger or more inspiring programme, but for the determination to achieve what little we may set before ourselves. The task is immense. There is to-day a greater determination on the part of the rulers not to part with power, as they have succeeded in creating disruption in our ranks. The Ordinance rule of the past four years indicates the extent to which Government can go to suppress the movement for freedom, even though it may be probably non-violent. Bengal and N.-W. Frontier have been raped seemingly beyond repair. It is difficult to breathe free in the one and it is impossible to understand the situation in the other. There have been deplorable acts of terrorism in Bengal, but unmanning the whole youth of vast areas is not the way to fight it. The N.-W. Frontier Province which has had a severe spell of repression, which the brave Pathans led by that selfless and patriotic servant Abdul Gaffar Khan have borne with exemplary restraint is forbidden ground for him and for his brother. There is constructive work enough and to spare, to occupy the time and energies of those who care for it. The resolution on cent per cent. Swadeshi that Mahatmaji has embodied in [p. 940] his second statement is a vital one. If the infatuation with high-sounding slogans has not blinded our reasons, we should see that Khadi with cent per cent. Swadeshi is enough to take us to our goal of complete independence which in Mahatmaji's language "is an impossible dream without the higher classes merging themselves in those millions who are miscalled lower classes".

COUNCIL-ENTRY PROGRAMME

There is lastly the Councils programme. The All-India Congress Committee has decided to contest elections to the Legislative Assembly, so that the country might pronounce its verdict on the White Paper and the repressive policy of the Government. I hope that the electors will show by unmistakable action that the Congress possesses their full confidence. Let us not, however, be led away by the idea that Swaraj can be achieved by anything we could do in the legislatures. We have to remember that the price for freedom must be paid before we can get it and while we have every reason to be proud of what has been done and what the country has suffered, it is, after all, yet inadequate for the great object we have in view. The task we have taken upon ourselves is great and glorious. It requires inexhaustible patience, unflinching determination and unending sacrifice. Time and world forces are helping us and, above all, God is with us in this great epic struggle of an unarmed people fighting with the weapons of Satyagraha of Truth and Non-Violence a most powerful Government armed cap-a-pie and equipped with the latest engines of destruction devised by science and human ingenuity. For us there is no turning back. The goal is clear. It is nothing short of Independence.

MEANING OF INDEPENDENCE

Independence is the natural outcome of all that the freedom movement in India has stood for. It cannot mean isolation particularly when we remember that it has to be achieved by non-violence. It means the end of exploitation of one country by another and of one part of the population of the same country by another part. It contemplates a free and friendly association with other nations for the [p. 941] mutual benefit of all. It forebodes evil to none, not even to those exploiting us except in so far as they rely upon exploitation rather than goodwill. The sanction behind this Independence movement is non-violence which in its positive and dynamic aspect is goodwill of and for all. We already see signs of how it has begun appealing to a certain extent to world opinion. This appeal has to become irresistible. It can do so according as the element of distrust and suspicion, which has its birth in fear, is eliminated and replaced by a sense of security born of confidence in the goodwill of India. India, having no designs on others, will not then need a large army either for its protection against foreigners or for internal peace which will stand guaranteed by the goodwill of her inhabitants. Having no designs on others, she will be able to claim immunity from the evil designs of others, and her safety will be buttressed and protected by the goodwill of the world at large. Conceived in this light, our Independence ought not to frighten even the British unless they aim at perpetuating the present unnatural conditions.

The method too is crystal clear. It is active, dynamic, non-violent, mass action. We may fail once; we may fail twice; but we are bound to succeed some day. Many have already lost their lives and all. Many more have sacrificed themselves in their struggle for freedom. Let us not be deterred by the difficulties which confront us nor diverted from our straight course by fear or favour. Our weapons are unique and the world is watching the progress of great experiment with interest and high expectation. Let us be true to our creed and firm in our determination. Satyagraha in its active application may meet with temporary set-backs but it knows no defeat. It is itself a great victory, for as James Lowell put it:

Truth for ever on the scaffold

Wrong for ever on the throne

Yet that scaffold sways the future

And behind the dim unknown

Standeth God within the shadow

Keeping watch above His own.