Nelson Evening Mail MONDAY, MAY 4, 1931 GANDHI'S IMPUDENCE

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIV, 4 May 1931, Page 4

Nelson Evening Mail MONDAY, MAY 4, 1931 GANDHI'S IMPUDENCE

OUR- readers will have noticed the reply which Gandhi made to an American journalist, who asked him if he will wear European clothes when he goes to sec King George at Buckingham Palace, to pay his homage as a delegate attending the forthcoming Indian Conference. Gandhi is reported to have said; “It would be discourtesy to the King if 1 appeared in any other than my native costume. If the weather permits I shall wear in England an ordinary loin-cloth.” There, it seems to us, is Gandhi's attitude towards the British Raj described in a nutshell. He will not do anything to flout and enrage the British Raj, but he will always adopt towards it an attitude which will show that he disrespects it. That is to say, in all he does ho will demonstrate to the people of India his superiority to the British, whose authority in India, once supreme, is now and henceforth inferior to that of himself and the regime which he would wish to establish; and it would seem that that is the attitude which he proposes to adopt towards the King, and the British Government and nation when he attends the Indian Conference in the middle of the English summer. In everything he does, whether in India or in Great Britain, lie will try to demonstrate to his followers the contempt lie lias for the British.

There is an old saying, “In Rome, do as the Romans do.” Similarly it is a safe policy for a stranger in London to do as the Londoners do. It is quite true that in the Empire’s greatest city more latitude is allowed to foreigners than was ever allowed in Imperial Rome to members of her subject races, but London has her limits as regards the latitude which strangers may use within her gates. For instance, when the Maori “King,” Tawhiao, and his attendant chiefs went to London, in the ’eighties of the last century, they did not dance a liaka in Trafalgar Square, or, dressed merely in the piupiu, attempt to visit the House of Commons. No, in tophats and broadcloth suits, they attracted quite enough attention to give no small difficulty to the police, whene’er they took their walks abroad in the London streets, where their tattooed faces were novelty enough to impede the passage of pedestrians. The effect of Gandhi dressed simply in a loin-cloth, in Piccadilly, with perhaps his favourite umbrella shading him from the sun, can be more easily imagined than described. Londoners are accustomed to see in their streets all sorts of strangers—negroes from Darkest Africa, Chinese, Lascar sailors from ships trading with India and the East, and members of innumerable coloured races which are subject to the British Crown —but all such folk go clothed decorously enough when they walk abroad in the great metropolis, or they do not walk there at all. The probability is that if Gandhi, dressed solely in his loin-cloth, were to stroll down the Strand, he would find himself in the cells at Vine street in about five minutes. If then his nudity is to be deprecated in the streets of London, what shall be said of his proposal to exhibit it before the King in Buckingham Palace?

The fact is that Gandhi may call himself a mahatmah (or sonfething of that sort), but a streak of insolence runs through all his conduct. And it seems to be studied insolence, carefully exhibited for the purpose of belittling British authority and of exalting himself, whenever he displays it before the Indian people. .Apparently he imagines that he may carry his impudence to the foot of the Throne. All civilised people know that there are prescribed rules of conduct for use in the presence of the King, and among them a certain etiquette in regard to dress. Queen Victoria was very strict in regard to that matter. King George may not be so strict. But if Gandhi imagines that lie will be admitted to Buckingham Palace, much loss to the presence of the King i and Queen, dressed solely in his loincloth, we think he is much mistaken. We have discussed this somewhat ridiculous question at some length, because it bears on the subject of British prestige in India, and the ignorance or insolence of the man who, if he could, wofild control the political destiny of India. Of course he will not be allowed into the presence of the King and Queen dressed solely in hi 3 loin-cloth. He will do in Rome as Rome does,” or he will not remain there very long. His expressed intention to persist in his nudity, in London, weather permitting, is merely his way of expressing his contempt for the British. His pi-oposal to appear nearly naked before the King was merely his manner of exalting himself and reducing the prestige of the Crown. But there need be no apprehension that he will be allowed to score off King George as he seems to have done off more than one Viceroy, and for a very simple reason, which is that any indignity which he might wish to offer the Crown in the presence of other In- 1 dian delegates would be so much resented by them that he would be unable to proceed. Disrespect to the King is rendered almost impossible by Court etiquette. It would be doubly impossible in the presence of the Indian Princes whose dignity would be outraged if that of the King-Emperor were insulted by an ignorant or insolent Hindu.