The point I wanted to make is this. On a previous occasion it was suggested that the principle having been settled, it is brought up in another shape today, and so this amendment should not be taken up. I put it to you, Sir, and through you to the House, that even if one had put up this idea at the time that the general principles of the Constitution were considered, I would invite the House dispassionately to consider the point I am making now, namely that 14 or 15 months ago, when we decided upon what are called the leading principles, and nothing more than the leading principles, we were under a stress and strain, and were passing through difficult circumstances and were under influences, which, I venture to submit, deflected our judgment, unbalanced our outlook, and, therefore, we voted for and accepted ideas, which, in my opinion, were not then, and are not consistent with the idea of a true, real, working democracy, in every sphere of life. If you wish to go back on it I have nothing more to say. After 15 months we are now in a position to take a more sober, balanced, and impartial view of the situation. As such if we are true to our ideals, if we are true to the principles which we have proclaimed from the house-top, if we are true to the slogans on which we asked the old Imperialist regime to quit and yield place to the children of the soil, I put it to you, Sir, that there is nothing improper, there is nothing out of the way for me to put before the House this amendment. It is after all for the House to judge. I only want to submit to the House the considerations on which it can accept my point of view.
