S.DE.N.C. Mamidanna

From 

S.DE.N.C. Mamidanna, B.A., (America)(L.S.G.D. (Bombay),
Wigram Road, Innispeta,
Rajahmundry. 

TO 

THE SECRETARY,
CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY OF INDIA,
NEW DELHI.  

Honoured Sir,  

I have the honour to express before you and elicit therefrom the implication of the administration of the indegenous Government as I have more interest in the art of administration of the Country. This is a subject of an elaborate character. As your honour’s Government often stresses to concentrate upon the shaping out of the destiny of our Nation, I have written a Thesis upon the title “EFFIGY” and few questions that have – confronted to me in connection with the Commonwealth World. As a born citizen of South India, I want to know from your honour correct information, about the following:- please excuse me for my frank way of dealing with your honour.  

What is Power? What is rule? What is Seal? What is sovereigni ty? All these, no doubt, do come under one comprehensive term. Before we go deep into the matter better to know at the outset, what a Sovereign power is? And what is it that necessitates our present Government to draw for its attention?  

As everybody knows that ides of Agust 1947 forms a longttude in the history of our beloved mother our present Government to whom the whip of the Nation is entrusted or the power of ruling is transferred, — is bestowed with responsibilities, several and remarkable. The Central Government of India is in a dilemma to fix the sovereign power, or the power of the sovereignity or the seal to the land. 

Prior to the ides of August 1947 the sovereign power in India or the sovereignity by which our beloved Mother noble, innocent, humble and gentle and majestic, was well sapped by Hanoverian dynasty, which established Empire in India,by conniving at our Hindus, dismantled my malicious motive. I.e., King of England after conquest and being in possession of the Empire thenceforward, was called after the Emperor of India. Now by 15th of August 1947 after the transference of the reins of the Government to the responsible Indian Hands, the term “Empire” with the title “Emperor” has ceased to exist: while the effigy of King George VI of England is in currency. Not only that, one peculiar feature is that the Governor-General is in vogue but new elements, by names Premier and Parliament have o emerged. In British India the sovereign power was vested in the hands of the King of England and represented through the designation Governor-General-in Council, [unclear]under whom several Governors over Provinces are in existence. When the transformancetion of th[unclear]e power has taken place, like a nightmare on the midnight of August 15th of 1947, why should be, and with what object should is the designation Governor-General, though constitutional, should be allowed.xxxxxxxxxx to move on the lips of the public despite of the so-called attainment of Independence to India under the term “Dominion Status.” Very strange and mysterious. Is the power completely based in the hands of the public? Or is i t placed, in the hands completely of the Premier, or the Governor-General, or[unclear] Parliament? Or is it placed still, in the hands of the King of England? In whose hands it is vested? Whose decision in matters of passing laws, or framing Acts, or Constitution, is final? Whose seall is to be affixed to it? Is it the seal of the Governor-General that shall have to be made responsible for the pros and cons of the Acts, or Acts of that of the Premier, or that of the Parliament, who represent at present Congress, out of whose toils and labours, this infinitismally small independence, under Dominion Status is obtained, or achieved, is the problem to be mooted? Hitherto, if any Act was made of if any act xxwas/performed, the seal or the fassimile of the King of England in some respect or other as an[unclear] authenticity to that effect, xx was affixed. But now, in Indian India, i.e., in the Dominion of India whose fassimile has to be affixed [unclear]as final and authentic representing thes sovereign power of the land. 

Prior to the ides of August 1947 the sovereign power in India or the sovereignity by which our beloved Mother noble, innocent, humble and gentle and majestic, was well sapped by Hanoverian dynasty, which established Empire in India,by conniving at our Hindus, dismantled my malicious motive. I.e., King of England after conquest and being in possession of the Empire thenceforward, was called after the Emperor of India. Now by 15th of August 1947 after the transference of the reins of the Government to the responsible Indian Hands, the term “Empire” with the title “Emperor” has ceased to exist: while the effigy of King George VI of England is in currency. Not only that, one peculiar feature is that the Governor-General is in vogue but new elements, by names Premier and Parliament have o emerged. In British India the sovereign power was vested in the hands of the King of England and represented through the designation Governor-General-in Council, [unclear]under whom several Governors over Provinces are in existence. When the transformancetion of th[unclear]e power has taken place, like a nightmare on the midnight of August 15th of 1947, why should be, and with what object should is the designation Governor-General, though constitutional, should be allowed.xxxxxxxxxx to move on the lips of the public despite of the so-called attainment of Independence to India under the term “Dominion Status.” Very strange and mysterious. Is the power completely based in the hands of the public? Or is i t placed, in the hands completely of the Premier, or the Governor-General, or[unclear] Parliament? Or is it placed still, in the hands of the King of England? In whose hands it is vested? Whose decision in matters of passing laws, or framing Acts, or Constitution, is final? Whose seall is to be affixed to it? Is it the seal of the Governor-General that shall have to be made responsible for the pros and cons of the Acts, or Acts of that of the Premier, or that of the Parliament, who represent at present Congress, out of whose toils and labours, this infinitismally small independence, under Dominion Status is obtained, or achieved, is the problem to be mooted? Hitherto, if any Act was made of if any act xxwas/performed, the seal or the fassimile of the King of England in some respect or other as an[unclear] authenticity to that effect, xx was affixed. But now, in Indian India, i.e., in the Dominion of India whose fassimile has to be affixed [unclear]as final and authentic representing thes sovereign power of the land. 

The factions among the parties, and the disaffection among the civilians of the country aor the Continent, are apparent. Elective element is deep-rooted. The present Government whatever name one may attest to it, or to whichever party it may represent, has overthrown the foreign Government and made an indirect conquest of the land. The Government in vogue, has been given a portion of the state in a Country or continent, for which they are made held responsible? What is State? This is more misleading and loose. This doesn’t mean situation or condition. It is something more. It means the effect of divide at impera, and the a device to establish sovereignity in the territory of the land, so demarkated for a purpose independent of the throne, but standing on a par with it. The present Govenment have an idea of stablising in the country a secular state, as opposed to spiritual or immortal one. For it, they have to assign to some sovereign power. 

The word sovereign is very dangerous, troublesome and misleading. Unless this is well understood, constitution in any country or continent or city framed for the purpose, is sure to fail. What is sovereignity? What is sovereign power? It is not the sovereign that we get in a market. It is not the power of the sovereign that by purchase evrybody enjoys. Then what is it? It is something else and high [unclear] above the human thought. Sovereignity in fact, is the power of the quality, noble ideal and royal focussing from the throne, to all corners of the globe, thus enabling the machnery of the Government to withstand with rule and administration in existence, in pursuance of the laws of the nature. Throne is the seat of the sovereignity, from which, the batteries or the dynamo xxx or the beams of the soul;— ma[unclear]chinery of the Government functions through and through. The present Government might not have taken, in their xxxxxxx hurry to solve their problems confronted to them, cognisance of it. To err is human. Otherwise, sovereignity might have been fixed; |Prior to their sitting for framing of the constitution. Constitution making is not the work of all. It may be the work of one umi[unclear]ue unique soul, or the combination of several qualities imbibed by birth and embodied in one individual great and ideal. Who is Manu? C Who is Chanikya? Who are Cornwallis and [unclear]ellisley? [unclear]hat is Gandhi? They all live in deeds. It is upon their deeds everybody now is able to criticise or comment. There must be some foundation of everything. And that foundation must be scientific, ideal, constitutional and all comprehensive. 

For human machine, foundation is the character. For society, is the family, which forms neighbourliness and fellowship. Society is the unit of the world, moving freely all over the corners octave of the globe bearing characteristic features peculiar | but common with each other. Sovereignity is the foundation for of the rule. Rule is te the measure to check the disobedient. Disregarding this theorem making, or framing, or modifying the constitution, prima facie on the basis of their xxxxxxxxxx predecessors, did as aliens under a different garment, implies, that the present Government has been aware of the sovereignity whether foreigner or indigenious under a mimicy. While fully xxx being aware of what they do, they tactfully deleted and stressed upon the world sovereignity, without which no kingdom exists. Without llghtlight there can never be a day. Without water, there can never be a land. Without soul there can never be an exisetence. Likewise without plant there can never be a seed. Fully aware of this, the present Government clever and wise as they are, they restored the emblem of Asoka the great, one of the late Indian Empeororsl But unfortunately, Asoka along with the emblem is not to be seen, but for his demise. Umless Asoka’s shul soul has taken shape, and is embodied in the human structure xxxxx of, either of the Premier’s or that of his Governor General, or diffused in the parliament, how can his, o or hers, fassimile be used, as if he, or she, are present, mute, and reticencet. If late Gandhi, our beloved Father, were to be alive, and whose services were recognised, whether impartially, that by each and every individual, there is some meaning in it, in assigning to xxx his favour sovrreignity, though superficially for the present. But for his demise like Asoka the great, we wish missed the opportunity. 

Even then no cognisance can be given to it, unless they really represent Asoka. One may accept the theories of a the late Asoka, like that of Gandhi. But is it not objectonable in the court of law, to have a false personification? Asoka is no more in phicical physical body: but lives in deeds. Gandhi is no more, but lives in deeds. It is he the case with every people great. Greatness never lies in age. But the question is, whether the seal or fassimile or effigy orf those deceased, can be brought into force? it is quite out of question to dream? Is it not illegal? Du due Due to the political reasons, even if it is said, that the presaent Government have accepted in toto, the insignia or cccccccc the emblem of late indeginious Emperor Asoka the great, does it not imply that they have indirectly consented to monarchy withouthat of crown. Our present Government is apt for such thinking. For the Dominion under control, does not cover the whole of India. Portions of the body were eaten away by white ants. Hnead id is under delirium: are mzz arms are maimed. Body is full of tToxin. Under this condition, our present Government want what to fix an memblem to be designed, on currency and other documents. 

Instrument of accession and succession to the throne in pursuance of Hnindu royal lineage ought to have been framed affixing seal to it, without which nothing can be made valid. Paraxodidal as it is, how the present Government giving consent to monarchy without sovereignity, indirectly on one hand, and on the other declaring that India wants republic etc, which may be said as devices or excegencies of the day. How can the passing of Zamindari bill or any ohther bill that may be given legal effect. amidst dynamic constitutional and transitoanal period, in lieu lieu of sovereignity not fixed, or ascertained so far by simple acceptance by simple acceptance of the Governor-General, constitutionally shaped after 15th August, 1947 and in !existence prior to that date? The moment the British or the foreign rulers have been said to have lost their Indian Empire, the very moment it is presumed that the Governor-General and acts thereon, have become in toto null and void and cannot be treated as, either representing from that date King of England, or acting as King of India, under the designation Emperor of Dominion of India. So, the procedure adopted by the Government regarding the stablisation of the so-called sovereignity or fixing up Constitution, and thereby giving a legal tender to certain conspicuous acts and currency may be said to be, erroneous and deviating from the path of righteousness. This is not administering local bodies, or is it the process of administering provinces. It is the process of holding complete and full responsibility on behalf of the nation, and administering the country in full vigour, with foresight, broad outlook and nobility. 

Is there no special procedure to be adopted, while either fixing up sovereignity, or making up Constitution. The procedure adopted by the present Government mright be based, on that laid down by the British people, who have left the Indian soil with lingering. 

April 27th, 1949, forms another stage in the history of Dominion of India; for that is the day where and when India is associated with as one of the members of the Commonwealth world making distinction from in the rest of the world. The term World in fact does not mean composition of the six continents or five, geographically as the case may be. It means formation of unique mass upon which and over and above, species of all kinds and varieties, mingle and move together with ties closed. There is nothing like Commonwealth world in the the existence of the universe, unless it is created by the humanity. Commonwealth has its own meaning, and sphere to act. Its meaning is rigid, narrow and limited xxxxxxxxxx politically. India’s relation with the Great Britain cannot be taken as social and informal, as it is a political problem. In the Indian Republic dated 29th ultimo, it is clearly stated and published a declaration to be placed on record, made by the representatives of all the Countries, that have agreed upon for the evolution of the solution for the Commonwealth world. 

It clearly manifests, that all countries convened for the Conference in London, are united as members of the British Commonwealth of Nations and owe a common alligeance to be the Crown which is also a symbol of their free association etc. 

Sirdar Vallabhai Patel, Deputy xxx Prime minister describing London decision, as “bold and momentuous” states, that there was no question of allegiance to his majesty the King, who would “merely remain as a symbol of our free association”, deleting the word “British” in the Commonwealth. Punditji, the Premier of Dominion of India states, that India owe no allegiance to the King. “As a symbol of Commonwealth “ he says we will respect his position but he will have no function”. 

1. Which of the above three statements should be taken as final and law-abiding, giving[unclear] legally validity by the Constitutional Law, framed for the purpose created in a Constitution. 
2. Why the term “British” when once it is said as deleted in the term “British Commonwealth of Nations” is used again in the London News. 
3. In what aspect is the problem of Commonwealth relation taken up — is it in a shape of legislation or in the shape of political relation to be preserved between father and son, husband and wife (socially) or India and Great Britain. 

P.T.O. 

5. Can there be a symbol without a being in existence? [unclear]how can a symbol of non-existence be valid in lieu of existence in the Universe? without Sun can anyone see a shadow; without a King or a Crown can any one deny the question of symbol or shadow of it displaying the sovereign power; without a day c can there be a night; Shadow and existence, in fact follow as soul inand human machine. That is why London news confirms xxxxxxxx position of the Crown to whom a allegiance is inevitable requiring legislation, to add some more weight to it, as a result of political change in India since 15th August, 1947, allowing Indians to have a status of their own. out of lip sympathy, which makes little: So long as symbol or insignia of the Crown is continuous, so long it is said to be that India is under a heel of the representative monarchy under a new garb, in liew of British Imperialism, under Commonwealth. 

Please forgive my follies.  

Rajahmundry,
15 — 5 — 1949.  

Yours faithfully,

Copy submitted to 
The Premier, 
Dominion of India.  

(Notes: 
1.Certain content in the document was unclear or incompletely written. The same has been marked as [unclear].
2.Typographical errors in the original document have been retained to ensure authentic reproduction of the original document.)