848 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
their existing rights would be affected. There are, again, people who do not like to enjoy the rights of marriage and divorce as prescribed in this Bill. To them also, it would be a hardship. From any point of view, therefore, the application of this law to the peculiar circumstances of each State must be left to the local Legislature.
Then Sir, I have been jeered and jibed at many times.
12 N OON
Babu Ramnarayan Singh (Bihar) : No.
Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : That has been my privilege. I believe that the delay that has occurred was due to two reasons, the author of both the reasons being Dr. Ambedkar himself. First of all the Bill was sent to the Select Committee. For reasons best known to him, it came back from the Select committee in the form of an altogether new Bill. That led to some controversy, which took about six months’ time. I submit that this portion of the delay was not due to me. If I had any fault, it was to point out the error and thereafter it was for the House to give a ruling.
Shri B. Das (Orissa) : Why apologise ?
Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : That delay was due to Dr. Ambedkar himself. I do not blame him for this. I do not attribute any motive to him.
Dr. Ambedkar : He forgives me!
Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : Probably, he wanted to improve matters and make matters worse.
The next reason for the delay was…………
Dr. Ambedkar : I do not think any hon. Member of this House has charged my hon. friend with dilatory tactics and I do not see why he should indulge in an explanation which is certainly not wanted, so far as I am concerned. He is wasting time.
Shri Naziruddin Ahmad : No, Sir. At least one word by way of explanation is necessary. Although I might not have referred to it, the charge has definitely been made and it goes in the proceedings to be read even after 100 years. I submit that the next reason for the delay was that in the Bill which was referred to the Select Committee, there were enormous numbers of substantial changes and those matters had to be put before the House just to argue that the members of the Select Committee had not a proper opportunity to consider them in detail. Those controversies are gone, but public memory is short and Ministerial memory is shorter. By a strange