352 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
Council in the Queen vs Edulji Byramji case, decided in 1840 and reported in 5 Moore’s Privy Council cases (p. 276) wherein they said (p. 294) that the Crown could not even by charter part with its prerogative. It is, therefore, obvious that the statement by the Cabinet Mission that the Crown will not exercise Paramountcy is contrary to the Constitutional Law by which the Empire is governed.
Ultimate Sanction
Again, a statute passed by the Parliament of Great Britain abrogating Paramountcy would be improposed. The reason is obvious. The army is the ultimate sanction for Paramountcy. This Army has been the India Army for which British India has paid all long. Without the aid of this powerful army maintained by British India and placed at the disposal of the Crown through the agent, the Viceroy and the GovernorGeneral of India, the Crown would never have been able to build up and conserve the powers of Paramountcy. These powers are of the nature of a trust held by Crown for the benefit of the people of India, and it would be a gross abuse of power on the part of the British Parliament to pass a Statute distroying that trust.
Dr. Ambedkar, in conclusion, says, whatever the choice of the Indian States may be, the duty of the people of India is clear. On their behalf, the Interim Government should notify his Majesty’s Government that the British Parliament has no right to pass any law, abrogating Paramountcy and that any clause to that effect in the forthcoming legislation, conferring Dominion States on India, should be treated by the people of India as repugnant to their sovereignty and, therefore, null and void, and to declare that the Government of India will never recognise any Indian State as Sovereign Independent. [1] -
��
1 : The Times of India, dated 18th June 1947
Reprinted : Khairmode, Vol. 8, Pp. 195-198.
- For comments on the Statement see Appendix-IX and X.