Date: 21 November 1930
Location: London
Speaker: Aga Khan III
Source: Speeches of Aga Khan III – K K Aziz
Full Text
Practically every school of Indian thought has expressed its views – unanimity on self-government – assurances to British commercial interests – a federal scheme could lead to full self-government and responsibility.
Mr. Prime Minister, I did not intend speaking here either to-day or at any stage of these proceedings but some of the members of the British India Delegation have told me, as recently as last night and this morning, that it was my duty to express my views.
I have come quite unprepared, but the best preparation of all has been the proceedings of this Conference. You, Sir, and the British representatives of the three Parties of the State have heard practically every school of Indian thought. From the Hindus to the Muslims, coming down across the centre, nearly every school has spoken. Their Highnesses, the Princes, have spoken. If we eliminate all differences, there is on one point complete una nimity. We all ask for a full measure of self-government. I think, as Chairman of the British India Delegation, working in co operation with the two other Delegations, I can say that we are all unitedly asking for that. We ask you to promise us the frame work. If the picture that we are to paint on it is unsatisfactory to any of the important minorities, or to the Princes, or to a small section of the minorities, we will try again – and if we fail we will try again: and we will continue trying till we produce something that will be generally satisfactory. I, for one, am particularly anxious that it shall be in a form which will ensure that, not only every Indian minority, but the British commercial element in India shall be satisfied that their interests are safe in our hands.
As to the interests of this country, a united India could offer her a far greater security as to her commercial interests than anything she has at present; could offer her a long-dated treaty on the lines of the German-Russian Treaty of 1904. For many years that would ensure your commerce fair and equitable treatment, and that would give your people a sense of security. The same applies to debt and to other interests, which would be infinitely safer than merely relying, as at present, on th~ strength of this country and not on a consented agreement with India.
Mr. Prime Minister, there is no reason why, if we can produce a federal scheme that will please the Princes, that will please the Hindus, that will please the Muslims, that will please the smaller minorities and that will satisfy all the legitimate commercial interests, and at the same time for a period reserve certain objects, there is no reason why we should not at this moment start on the basis of full self-government and responsibility.
Source: Indian R.ound Table Conference: 12th. November 1930-19th. January 1931:
Proceedings, His Majesty’s Stationery Office, London, 1931, Cmd. 3778, pp. 180-1.
For those interested in the audience which heard the Aga Khan make this speech I give below a complete list of the delegates to the first session of the Round Table Conference:
British Delegation J. Ramsay MacDonald (President of the Conference) Lord Sankey (Deputy President of the Conference) Wedgwood Benn Arthur Henderson J. H. Thomas Sir Williamjowitt H.B. Lees Smith Earl Russell Earl Peel ( Chairman of the Conference) Marquess of Zetland Sir Samuel Hoare Oliver Stanley Marquess of Reading (Chairman of the Conference) Marquess of Lothian Sir Robert Hamilton Isaac Foot Indian States’ Dekgation Maharaja of Alwar Gaekwar of Baroda ( Chairman of the Conference) Nawab of Bhopal (Chairman of the Conference) Maharaj a of Bikaner ( Chairman of the Conference) Maharaja Rana of Dholpur Maharaj a ofJ ammu and Kashmir Maharaja of Nawanagar Maharaja of Patiala Maharaja of Rewa Chief Sahib of Sangli Sir Prabhashankar Pattani Sir Manubhai Mehta Sardar Sahibzada Sultan Ahmad Khan Nawab Sir Muhammad Akbar Hydari Sir Mirza Muhammad Ismail Colonel KN. Haksar (Secretary General to the Indian States’ Delegation) British Indian Delegation The Aga Khan (C hairman of the Conference) Sir C. P. Ramaswami Aiyar Maulana Muhammad Ali (d ied during the Conference session) Dr. B. R. Ambedkar Sarijut Chandradhar Barooha J. N. Basu Sir Muhammad Shah Nawaz Khan Bhutto Sir Hubert Carr C. Y. Chintamani N awab Sir Ahmad Said Khan Chchattari Maharajaadhiraj of Darbhanga Captain Raja Sher Muhammad Khan A. K Fazlul Haq A. H. Ghuznavi Lt.-Col. H. A. J. Gidney Sir Ghulam Husain Hidayatullah Hafiz Hidayat Husain B. V.Jadhav M. R. Jayakar Sir Cowsaji J ehangir Muhammad Ali Jinnah T. F. Gavin Jones N. M.Joshi Dr. Narendranath Law Sir B. N. Mitra Sir P. C. Mitter H.P. Mody B. S. Moonje Ramaswami Mudaliar Raja Narendra Nath A. T. Pannir Selvam Raja of Parlakimedi Sir A. P. Patro KT. Paul Sahibzada Nawab Sir Abdul Qaiyum M. Ramachandra Rao Sir Sayyid Sultan Ahmad Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru B. Shiva Rao Sir Mian Muhammad Shafi Sardar Sampuran Singh Srinivasa Sastri (Chairman of the Conference) Sir Chimanlal Setalvad Kanwar Bisheshwar Dayal Seth Sir Phiroze Sethna Dr. Shafa’at Ahmad Khan Begum Shah Nawaz M. R. Rao Bahadur Srinivasan Mrs. Subbarayan S. B. Tambe Sardar Ujjal Singh Sir C. E. Wood Zafrullah Khan Officials Attending in Consultative Capacity Sir W. M. Hailey Sir C. A. Innes Sir A. C. MacWatters H. G. Haig L. W. Reynolds Indian States’ Advisers Hyderabad: Sir Richard Chenevix-Trench Nawab Mehdi Yar Jang Sir Ahmad Husain, AminJang Sir Reginald Glancy South Indian States: T. Raghaviah Gaekwar of Baroda: Krishnama Chari Orissa States: K C. Neogy Chamber of Princes: L. F. Rushbrook-Williams Qazi Ali Haider Abbasi Sardar Jarmani Das A.B.Latthe D. A. Surve On the Round Table Conferences see the White Papers bearing the command numbers Cmd. 3772 (1931), 3778 (1931), 3972 (1931), 3997 (1932), 4069 (1932), 4147 (1932), 4238 (1933), 4268 (1933); India: The Commission and the Conference: A &print of Leading Articles from “The Times” on Indian Question from the Return of the Statutory Commission from India to the Conclusion of the Round Table Conference in London, London, 1931; N. Gangulee, The Making of Federal India, London, n.d. (?1937); D. Madhava Rao, The Indian Round Table Conference and After, London, 1932; R. Coupland, The Indian Problem 1833-1935: &port on the Constitutional Problem in India, Part 1, London, 1942; Lord Halifax, Fullness of Days, London, 1957; Chimanlal H. Setalvad, Recollections and R.eflections, Bombay, n.d. (?1946); Lord Simon, Retrospect: the Memoirs of the Rt. Hon. Viscount Simon, G.C.S.I., G.C. V.O., London, 1952; Lord Templewood, Nine Troubled Yt?ars, London, 1954; R. Craddock, “After the Round Table Conference”, English Review, February 1931; “India After the Conference”, Round Table, June 1931; Lord Meston, “Round Table Difficulties”, Fortnightly .Review,January 1933; Hugh Molson, “The Third Round Table Conference”, Journal of the East India Associ ation, vol. for 1933; Muhammad Yakub, “Indian Muslims and the Reforms”, Asiatic Review, October 1933; “India: Conference on Intransigence”, Round Tab/,e, December 1930; Lord Meston, “The Indian Conference”, The Nineteenth Century and After, October 1930; W. P. Barton, “India: A Federation”, Empire Review, January 1931; J. R. MacDonald, “The Round Table Conference”, Listener, 28 January 1931; Lord Meston, “Round Table and After”, The Nineteenth Century and After, March 1931; “Round Table Problems”, Manchester Guardian, 8 September 1931; “The Round Table Conference”, Economist, 17 October 1931; Earl Winterton, “The Conference and After”, Fortnightly Review, February 1931; Marquess of Zetland, “The Round Table Conference and After”, Asiatic Review, July 1931; John Coatman, “The Round Table Conference”, The Nineteenth Century andAfter,January 1932;J. M. Kenworthy, “Some Thoughts on the Round Table Conference”, The Review of India, February 1932; Shafa’at Ahmad Khan, “Muslims in the New India”, Asiatic Review, January 1932; “The Results of the Round Table Conference”, Round Table, March 1932; and Marquess of Zetland, “The Indian Round Table Conference: The Second Phase”, Asiatic Review, July 1932.