[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR,—It is a pity
to find Sir Charles Spencer indulging in playing with words. In the last issue of the Spectator, Ile objects to the word" exclusion " (which I used in connexion with the absence of the Congress Party from the Round Table Conference), because he "understood" and does "believe it to be a fact" that the Congress Party along with all other political parties of India was "invited to come to the Conference," and that the Congress Party "of their own free will elected to stand out."
I have nothing to gainsay so far as he " understood " that the Congress was "invited to come to the Conference," for Ile might as well have "understood "—rather misunder- stood !----the present Indian political situation as calm as the Pacific, or might have " understood " with no less fancy that the legions have courted the gaol "of their own free will." But I should say "No" only when he "believes it to be a fact" that the Congress was " invited " and has been guilty of the "rejection."
Now, in point of fact, could he refer to the name of a single Congressman in that cumbrous list of sixty odd delegates published last month ? Could he point to a single one who in one way or the other was associated with the present activities of the Congress Party ? He must have " under- stood " then that the invitation to the Congress was tacit and implied as it has actually been. Would he not do better to refer to the editorial comments of the Daily Herald of the day on which the list of the delegates was published. The comments have made a plain case plainer still ; they clearly purported that the Congress has not been invited !
Let me just remind Sir Charles in this connexion of the invitation that has actually been extended to the Congressmen. I hope it is bright in public memory that within the last six months thousands of those Congressmen have been invited to be the guests of His Majesty in the prison cells of India
rather than in the St. James's Palace ! Sir Charles asserts that the Congress Party " out of their free will elected to stand out." Let me say there was neither a "free will" nor an election. How could you ascribe "free will" to those who have been bound band and foot -in gaols ? Therefore, I still maintain that the Congress has been excluded and it is wrong to term it "voluntary abstention" as he chooses
Previous page
