At the second Round Table Conference (London, September, 1931) MOHANDAS KARAMCHAND GANDHI (1869–1948)

At the second Round Table Conference (London,
September, 1931)
MOHANDAS KARAMCHAND GANDHI (1869–1948)

In March 1931, the Civil Disobedience Movement was suspended with the

signing of the Gandhi-Irwin pact. When the movement was at its peak,

Nehru estimated that over 90,000 persons had gone to jail. is is why the

suspension of the movement disillusioned many including Nehru who

remarked, echoing T.S. Eliot, ‘this is the way the world ends—Not with a

bang but a whimper.’ It was in this ambience of gloom and despair that the

Congress agreed to participate in the Second Round Table Conference to

be held in London in the autumn. Gandhi travelled to London as the sole

representative of the Congress. In his first speech to the conference, Gandhi

made a strong plea for the Congress as a body that included all sections of

Indians. e speech was delivered without notes and William Shirer, the

famous American journalist, thought it was ‘the greatest one of his long

political life.’

main speech

Lord Chancellor, Your Highness and Friends, I must confess at the outset

that I am not a little embarrassed in having to state before you the position

of the Indian National Congress. I would like to say that I have come to

London to attend this Committee, as also the Round Table Conference

when the proper time comes, absolutely in the spirit of co-operation, and to

strive to my utmost to find points of agreement. I would like also to give

this assurance to His Majesty’s Government that at no stage is it, or will it

be, my desire to embarrass authority and I would like to give the same

assurance to my colleagues here, that, however much we may differ about

I h ll b h h f M

our viewpoints, I shall not obstruct them in any shape or form. My

position, therefore, here depends entirely upon your goodwill, as also the

goodwill of His Majesty’s Government. If at any time I found that I could

not be of any useful service to the Conference, I would not hesitate to

withdraw myself from it. I can also say to those who are responsible for the

management of this Committee and the Conference that they have only to

give a sign and I should have no hesitation in withdrawing.

I am obliged to make these remarks because I know that there are

fundamental differences of opinion between the government and the

Congress, and it is possible that there are vital differences between my

colleagues and myself. ere is also a limitation under which I shall be

working. I am but a poor humble agent acting on behalf of the Indian

National Congress. And it might be as well to remind ourselves of what the

Congress stands for and what it is. You will then extend your sympathy to

me, because I know that the burden that rests upon my shoulders is really

very great. e Congress is, if I am not mistaken, the oldest political

organizaton we have in India. It has had nearly fifty years of life, during

which period it has, without any interruption, held its annual session. It is

what it means—national. It represents no particular community, no

particular class, no particular interest. It claims to represent all Indian

interests and all classes. It is a matter of the greatest pleasure to me to state

that it was first conceived in an English brain: Allan Octavius Hume we

knew as the father of the Congress. It was nursed by two great Parsis,

Pherozeshah Mehta and Dadabhai Naoroji, whom all India delighted to

recognize as its Grand Old Man. From the very commencement the

Congress had Mussalmans, Christians, Anglo-Indians—I might say all the

religions, sects, creeds—represented upon it more or less fully. e late

Badruddin Tyabji identified himself with the Congress. We have had

Mussalmans as presidents of the Congress, and Parsis undoubtedly. I can

recall at least one Indian Christian at the present moment, W.C. Bonerji.

Kalicharen Bannerji, than whom I have not had the privilege of knowing a

purer Indian, was also thoroughly identified with the Congress. I miss, as I

have no doubt all of you miss, the presence in our midst of Mr K.T. Paul.

Although—I do not know, but so far as I know—he never officially

belonged to the Congress, he was a nationalist to the full. As you know, the

late Maulana Mohammed Ali, whose presence also we miss today, was a

President of the Congress, and at present we have four Mussalmans as

b f h W k C h h f fif b

members of the Working Committee, which consists of fifteen members.

We have had women as our presidents: Dr Annie Besant was the first, and

Mrs Sarojini Naidu followed; we have her as a member of the Working

Committee also. And so, if we have no distinctions of class or creed, we

have no distinctions of sex either.

e Congress has, from its very commencement, taken up the cause of the

so-called untouchables. ere was a time when the Congress had at every

annual session as its adjunct the Social Conference, to which the late

Ranade dedicated his energies, among his many other activities. Headed by

him you will find, in the programme of the Social Conference, reform in

connection with the untouchables taking a prominent place. But in 1920,

the Congress took a large step and brought in the question of the removal

of untouchability as a plank on the political platform, making it an

important item of the political programme. Just as the Congress considered

Hindu-Muslim unity thereby meaning unity amongst all the classes to be

indispensable for the attainment of Swaraj, so also did the Congress

consider the removal of the curse of untouchability as an indispensable

condition for the attainment of full freedom. e position the Congress

took up in 1920 remains the same today; and so you will see the Congress

has attempted from its very beginning to be what it described itself to be,

namely, national in every sense of the term. If Your Highnesses will permit

me to say so, in the very early stages the Congress took up your cause also.

Let me remind this Committee that it was the Grand Old Man of India

who sponsored the cause of Kashmir and Mysore; and these two great

Houses, I venture in all humility to submit, owe not a little to the efforts of

Dadabhai Naoroji and the Congress. Even up to now the Congress has

endeavoured to serve the Princes of India by refraining from any

interference in their domestic and internal affairs.

I hope, therefore, that this brief introduction that I thought fit to give will

serve to enable the Committee, and those who are at all interested in the

claims of the Congress, to understand that it has endeavoured to deserve

the claim that it has made. It has failed, I know, often to live up to the

claim but I venture to submit that, if you were to examine the history of the

Congress, you would find that it has more often succeeded, and

progressively succeeded than failed. Above all, the Congress represents, in

its essence, the dumb, semi-starved millions scattered over the length and

breadth of the land in its 700,000 villages, no matter whether they come

f h ll d B h I d h ll d I d I d E

from what is called British India or what is called Indian India. Every

interest which, in the opinion of the Congress, is worthy of protection, has

to subserve the interests of these dumb millions; and so you do find now

and again apparently a clash between several interests. But, if there is a

genuine real clash, I have no hesitation in saying on behalf of the Congress

that the Congress will sacrifice every interest for the sake of the interests of

these dumb millions. It is, therefore, essentially a peasant organization, and

it is becoming so progressively. You will, even the Indian members of the

Committee, perhaps be astonished to find that today the Congress, through

its organization, the All India Spinners’ Association, is finding work for

nearly 50,000 women in nearly 2,000 villages, and these women are possibly

50 percent Mussalman women. ousands of them belong to the so-called

untouchable class. We have thus, in this constructive manner, penetrated

these villages, and effort is being made to cover every one of the 700,000

villages. It is a super human task; but if human effort can do so, you will

presently find the Congress covering all of these villages and bringing to

them the message of the spinning-wheel.

at being the representative character of the Congress, you will not be

astonished when I read to you the Congress mandate. I hope that it may

not jar upon you. You may consider that the Congress is making a claim

which is wholly untenable. Such as it is, I am here to put forth that claim

on behalf of the Congress in the gentlest manner possible, but also in the

firmest manner possible. I have come here to prosecute that claim with all

the faith and energy that I can command.

If you can convince me to the contrary and show that the claim is inimical

to the interests of these dumb millions, I shall revise my opinion. I am open

to conviction, but even so I should have to ask my principals to consent to

that revision before I could usefully act as the agent of the Congress.

At this stage I propose to read to you this mandate so that you can

understand clearly the limitations imposed upon me. is was a resolution

passed at the Karachi Congress:

is Congress, having considered the Provisional Settlement between the

Working Committee and the Government of India, endorses it, and desires

to make it clear that the Congress goal of Purna Swaraj, meaning complete

independence, remains intact. In the event of a way remaining otherwise

open to the Congress to be represented at any Conference with the

f h B h G h C d l ll

representatives of the British Government, the Congress delegation will

work for this goal; and in particular, so as to give the nation control over the

army, external affairs, finance, fiscal and economic policy, and to have

scrutiny by an impartial tribunal of the financial transactions of the British

Government in India, and to examine and assess the obligations to be

undertaken by India or England and the right to either party to end the

partnership at will: provided, however, that the Congress delegation will be

free to accept such adjustments as may be demonstrably necessary in the

interests of India.

en follows the appointment.

I have in the light of this mandate endeavoured, as carefully as I was

capable, to study the provisional conclusions arrived at by the several subcommittees

appointed by the Round Table Conference.

I have also carefully studied the Prime Minister’s statement giving the

considered policy of His Majesty’s Government. I speak as subject to

correction; but, so far as I have been able to understand this document, it

falls far short of what is aimed at and claimed by the Congress. True, I have

the liberty to accept such adjustments as may be demonstrably necessary in

the interests of India, but they have all to be consistent with the

fundamentals stated in this mandate.

I remind myself at this stage of the terms of what is to me a sacred

settlement the settlement arrived at Delhi between the Government of

India and the Congress. In that settlement the Congress has accepted the

principle of federation, the principle that there should be responsibility at

the Centre, and has accepted also the principle that there should be

safeguards in so far as they may be necessary in the interests of India.

ere was one phrase used yesterday. I forget by which delegate, but it

struck me very forcibly. He said, ‘We do not want a mere political

Constitution.’ I do not know that he gave that expression the same meaning

that it immediately bore to me; but I immediately said to myself, this phrase

has given me a good expression. It is true the Congress will not be and,

personally speaking, I myself would never be satisfied with a mere political

Constitution, which to read would seem to give India all it can possibly

politically desire, but in reality would give her nothing. If we are intent

upon complete independence, it is not from any sense of arrogance; it is not

because we want to parade before the universe that we have now severed all

h h B h l N h f h k d O h

connection with the British people. Nothing of the kind. On the contrary,

you find in this mandate itself that the Congress contemplates a

partnership, the Congress contemplates a connection with the British

people but that connection to be such as can exist between two absolute

equals. Time was when I prided myself on being, and being called, a British

subject. I have ceased for many years to call myself a British subject; I would

far rather be called a rebel than a subject. But I have aspired, I still aspire to

be a citizen, not of the empire, but in a Commonwealth; in a partnership if

possible if God wills it, an indissoluble partnership but not a partnership

superimposed upon one nation by another. Hence you find here that the

Congress claims that either party should have the right to sever the

connection, to dissolve the partnership. It has got to be necessarily,

therefore, of mutual benefit.

May I say it may be irrelevant to the consideration, but not irrelevant to me

—that, as I have said elsewhere, I can quite understand the responsible

British statesmen today being wholly engrossed in domestic affairs, in

trying to make two ends meet. We could not expect them to do anything

less; and I wondered, even as I was sailing towards London, whether we in

the Committee at the present moment would not be a drag upon the British

Ministers, whether we would not be interlopers. And yet I said to myself: It

is possible that we might not be interlopers; it is possible that the British

ministers themselves might consider the proceedings of the Round Table

Conference to be of primary importance even in terms of their domestic

affairs.

India, yes, can be held by the sword! I do not for one moment doubt the

ability of Britain to hold India under subjection through the sword. But

what will conduce to the prosperity of Great Britain, the economic freedom

of Great Britain, an enslaved but rebellious India, or an India an esteemed

partner with Britain to share her sorrows to take part side by side with

Britain in her misfortunes? Yes! If need be, but at her own will, to fight side

by side with Britain not for the exploitation of a single race or a single

human being on earth, but it may be conceivably for the good of the whole

world! If I want freedom for my country, believe me, if I can possibly help

it, I do not want that freedom in order that I, belonging to a nation which

counts one-fifth of the human race, may exploit any other race upon earth

or any single individual. If I want that freedom for my country, I would not

be deserving of that freedom if I did not cherish and treasure the equal

h f h k h f d A d I

right of every other race, weak or strong, to the same freedom. And so I

said to myself whilst I was nearing the shores of your beautiful island, per

chance it might be possible for me to convince the British Ministers that

India as a valuable partner, not held by force but by the silken cord of love,

an India of that character might conceivably be of real assistance to you in

balancing your Budget, not for one occasion but for many years. What

cannot two nations do one a handful, but brave, with a record for bravery

perhaps unequalled, a nation noted for having fought slavery, a nation that

has at least claimed times without number to protect the weak and another

a very ancient nation, counted in millions, with a glorious and ancient past,

representing at the present moment two great cultures, the Islamic and

Hindu cultures; if you will, also containing not a small but a very large

number of Christian population; and certainly absorbing the whole of the

splendid Zoroastrian stock, in numbers almost beneath contempt, but in

philanthropy and enterprise almost unequalled and certainly unsurpassed.

We have got all these cultures concentrated in India. And supposing that

God fires both Hindus and Musslmans represented here with a proper

spirit, so that they close ranks and come to an honourable understanding,

take that nation and this nation together, and I again ask myself and ask you

whether, with an India free, completely independent as Great Britain is,

whether an honourable partnership between these two cannot be mutually

beneficial, even in terms of the domestic affairs of this great nation. And so,

in that dreamy hope, I have approached the British Isles, and I shall still

cherish that dream.

And when I have said this perhaps I have said all; and you will be able to

dot the i’s and to cross the t’s, not expecting me to fill in all the details, and

tell you what I mean by control over the army, what I mean by control over

external affairs, finance, fiscal and economic policy, or even the financial

transactions which a friend yesterday considered to be sacrosanct. I do not

take that view. If there is a stocktaking between incoming and outgoing

partners, their transactions are subject to audit and adjustment; and the

Congress will not be guilty of any dishonourable conduct or crime in saying

that the nation should understand what it is to take over and what it should

not take over. is audit, this scrutiny, is asked for not merely in the

interests of India; it is asked for in the interests of both. I am positive that

the British people do not want to saddle upon India a single burden which

it should not legitimately bear; and I am here to declare, on behalf of the

C h h C ll h k f d l l

Congress, that the Congress will never think of repudiating a single claim

or a burden that it should justly discharge. If we are to live as an honourable

nation worthy of commanding credit from the whole world, we will pay

every farthing of legitimate debt with our blood.

I do not think that I should take you any further through the clauses of this

mandate and analyse for you the meaning of these clauses as Congressmen

give them. If it is God’s will that I should continue to take part in these

deliberations, as the deliberations proceed, I shall be able to explain the

implications of these clauses. As the deliberations proceed, I would have my

say in connection with the safeguards also. But I think I have said quite

enough in having, with some elaboration and with your generous

indulgence, Lord Chancellor, taken the time of this meeting. I had not

intended really to take that time, but I felt that I could not possibly do

justice to the cause that I have come to expound to you, the Committee,

and to the British nation of which we, the Indian delegates, are at present

the guests, if I did not give you out of the whole of my heart my cherished

wish even at this time. I would love to go away from the shores of the

British Isles with the conviction that there was to be an honourable and

equal partnership between Great Britain and India. I cannot do anything

more than say that it will be my fervent prayer, during all the days that I live

in your midst, that this consummation may be reached.

I thank you, Lord Chancellor, for courtesy that you have extended to me in

not stopping me, although I have taken close upon forty-five minutes. I was

not entitled to all that indulgence, and I thank you once more.