(18) Lieut. Col. Sir Henry Gidney 10-11-1933 - Page 765

z:\ ambedkar\vol-02\vol2-10.indd MK SJ+YS 21-9-2013/YS-8-11-2013 744

744 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES

that day in the House of Commons, I, at any rate, did not see any distinction, and that, I say, was your position as well, because I propose to read a passage which will make it clear. You say at column 234 : “I have finished and I am most grateful to the House for permitting me to intrude for so long upon their attention. What can we do but to preserve with our amendment. It is not a vote of confidence in His Majesty’s Government” and this is the important point, “On the contrary, it merely asserts the principles which they themselves affirm and which both the Prime Minister and the Secretary of State have affirmed.” So you yourself really saw no distinction between the proposals as put forth in the statement of the Prime Minister and the substance of your amendment ?

Sir Winston Churchill: Of course, I thought it was unfortunate that the Government did not take proper view of the proposal. I should have been very glad to get that amendment on the paper.

14,688. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: Let me quote another passage of what you said on the same day. You said your second alternative to the Government on that day was that if your amendment was not accepted you would be content to vote with the Government provided the pronouncement of the Prime Minister was accompanied by the speech of the Secretary of State that was made on that day in the House of Commons ?

Sir Winston Churchill: Yes.

14,689. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar: My point is this : If that is your position, namely, that you were content to vote with the Government on that particular debate, provided the Prime Minister’s announcement was accompanied by the speech made by the Secretary of State in the House of Commons, what I wish to understand from you is this : What is the difference between the White Paper as it is presented to this Committee and the statement of the Prime Minister combined with the speech of the Secretary of State ? Could you give us any difference that you see between the White Paper as presented to the Committee and the pronouncement of the Prime Minister as interpreted by the Secretary of State in the House of Commons ?

Sir Winston Churchill: In the case of a difference which arises in a Parliament or in a House of Commons between two sides of a debate, it is difficult for outsiders to appreciate what the difference was unless they understand all the circumstances which influence and affect our debates, but that there was a great and real difference between the amendment which I sought to have put upon the paper and the resolution which the Government passed over our heads is indisputable. There was a sharp difference. Each side naturally presents its case in the manner least likely to deter support, but the difference is there all the same and remains quite clear, and I do not suggest to Dr. Ambedkar that in justice to our Parliamentary institutions, he should remember that we still have a bica