The restriction you conveyed to Dr. Ambedkar and me in connection with his interview,I had no difficulty in understanding from the Government standpoint. It was faithfully carried out, and so far as I am concerned I shall breathe not a word to the public about it. But the threat conveyed at the end of your note was, I think, gratuitously offensive. You said that if either of us did not carry out the restriction, all such future interviews would be stopped. So far as I am concerned, it is easy enough for you to verify that I have meticulously observed the prison regulations. And the threat pre supposes that such interviews are a concession, whereas in my opinion they are the necessary consequence of the Yeravda Pact. Surely untouchability reform should be, if it is not, common cause between the Government and the people. Again a prison was assuredly not the place to spring upon Dr. Ambedkar, a free man restrictions accompainied by a threat of which he was not informed in the telegram acceding to his request for an interview with Srimati Sarojini Naidu and me.
May I in this personal note ask now for a definite reply to my letter of the 29th ult. addressed to Major Bhandari and forwarded to the Home Department? In view of your said memorandum, a cleart definition of the Government policy has become doubly necessary. I hold it to be essential that I should be permitted to see people and carry on correspondence, stirctly regarding untouchability, without let or hindrance. You may know that my fast is only suspended. It has to be resumed if the Hindu public do not play the game by the Harijans. My contact with the public therefore is inevitable if the reform is to be carried out in all its thoroughness. Sjt. A. V. Thakkar, the Secretary of the newly-formed League has already asked for instructions. I have informed him that I am awaiting clear definition of Government policy before I could send any instructions. I would therefore esteem an early reply.
