For Global Peace with Social Justice in a Sustainable Environment

Abul Kalam Azad and Mahatma Gandhi

Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav

Gandhian Scholar

Gandhi Research Foundation, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India

Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229

E-mail-dr.yadav.yogendra@gandhifoundation.net; dr.yogendragandhi@gmail.com

Abul Kalam Azad and Mahatma Gandhi

Abul Kalam Azad was Congress leader and scholar of Koranic theology; twice president of the Congress; Education Minister, Government of India. He was a generalist and he edited Urdu Weekly Al Hilal. He participated in Khilafat movement and later he joined congress. He elected president of congress twice in 1923 and 1940 respectively. Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “The arrest of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad is an event of importance equal with the arrest of the President elect. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad has an all-India reputation, especially among the Mussulmans. He is a seasoned soldier having been interned for years in Ranchi. He stands high in the ranks of the learned men of Islam. His arrest must sink deep in the hearts of the Mussulmans of India. What answer will the Hindus and Mussulmans of Bengal return? Action can only be answered by counter-action. We know what the answer should be. Will the thousands of Bengali Hindus and Bengali Mussulmans enroll themselves as volunteers and be arrested? Will Bengal wear only khadi or nothing? Will Bengali students give the answer that the President of the Congress expected from them in his moving appeal?”1

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “In the language of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, let us think of the greater temple, namely, India, which has been defiled for so many years by our submission to slavery. And if we have stood that defilement all these long years, let us not be provoked into madness by the illegal encroachments upon local temples and their still greater defilement by the intruders’ abuse of them. Is Lord Reading prepared to plead extenuation even in this case on the ground that the officials are engaged in the performance of a very trying duty?”2 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “Maulana Abul Kalam Azad was arrested. She became free as soon as it became clear that repression had fallen flat and that the people were not to be deterred from forming associations and holding public meetings even though they were assaulted and flogged. Freedom was ours when we were ready to pay the price for it. The settlement of our differences with the administrators is a matter of time. We cannot be said to be free so long as we need a certificate of freedom. He is not healthy who has needed to prove his health by producing a health certificate. Every man and woman who visited the Congress pandal felt in his or her own person the glow of freedom.”3

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “If Begum Abul Kalam Azad and the Maulana himself complain about the inadequacy of the sentence pronounced upon the Maulana Saheb, what must be the feeling of the President of the Congress and his devoted partner on having heard that he together with Mr. Sasmal was to have only 6 months’ simple imprisonment? Why on earth the trial should have been dragged and judgment postponed if such an untheatrical sentence was to be pronounced; only the Government can tell. The gossip that was sent to me along the rails was that the Government was seeking a suitable opportunity for discharging both the Maulana and the Deshbandhu. The latest gossip which is supposed to be authentic, I dare not disclose. Nor is it of importance for the reader to know. We must take, not even excluding the President, our lot as it comes to us. I am receiving biting letters from correspondents accusing me of simplicity, of hard-heartedness, of faintheartedness and all such kindred weaknesses. Some correspondents tell me that I have sold the cause of the prisoners. Others tell me I have thrown all my non-co-operation views to the winds and I have been faithless to the President of the Congress. Fortunately, many years of service have given me a fairly tough hide and these shafts do not pierce it, but I do assure all these impatient critics that not a particle of the principle of non-co-operation has been surrendered by the resolutions. On the contrary, refusal to suspend mass civil disobedience in the face of grave warning from Nature would have meant a complete surrender of the fundamental principle of non-co-operation. The discharge of prisoners I purposely brought to the surface when it became a point of national honour, because with the change of issue from the immediate attainment of the triple goal to the immediate attainment of the three-fold freedom the demand for the discharge of prisoners became a natural consequence. But Chauri Chaura has raised another immediate issue, viz., terrible penance and a fierce process of purification, and this penitential purification requires the sacrifice of the imprisoned workers and the temporary sacrifice of many of our activities which have revivified the nation. But such things happen in all wars, much more frequently in spiritual warfare such as ours is claimed to be. I call it spiritual in the sense that we have resolutely declined to make use of physical force for the attainment of our end. We were in danger of being drifted away from our moorings, and it was necessary for us to return, but the return is merely meant to give us greater purity, greater perception and therefore greater strength, and if non-co-operators have to become seasoned soldiers for the nation’s battle, they will doubtless understand the value of waiting and preparing. He who waits for preparation or otherwise, advances the cause as much as the warrior who stands three feet deep in the trenches. All our sufferings will have been lost upon us if we do not realize these elements of the science of war, whether it is spiritual or physical.”4

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “I have not yet received the telegram although the letter of advice tells me that it was sent both to Ahmadabad and Bardoli. I am able to give the telegram to the public only because the Secretary of the Bengal Provincial Khilafat Committee has very kindly sent me a copy by letter post at the instance of the Begum Sahaba. It is a matter of no small comfort that ladies occupying the highest station in life, are coming forward one after another to step into the breach created by the withdrawal of male national workers. I tender my congratulations to Begum Abul Kalam Azad for her having offered to take her share in the public work. The readers will take to heart the message of The Maulana. It is perfectly true that neither the Government nor the country is today prepared for any compromise. The Government will not be till we have suffered long and suffered more. Bengal has certainly led in the direction. Bardoli has yet done little. Twice has it been baulked of its privilege by cruel Nature, but it is a matter of no consequence whether it is Bengal or Bardoli which leads, so long as we get rid of a system which, as is daily becoming more and more clear, is based upon terrorism. In the present mood of the country there is little danger of the vital interests being sacrificed, as the Maulana fears, to the momentary pleasure of securing the release of How prisoners.”5

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “The Punjabis wanted an outsider to preside and if at all possible Maulana Abul Kalam Azad. The Maulana Sahib however was unwilling. He said, he would gladly attend but thought he would be more useful if he remained free. The Maulana’s position was appreciated. Pandit Motilalji was then approached. He was good enough to say he would preside, if he was not prevented by any untoward event, and if Pandit Motilalji was prevented from presiding, I was to fill in his place. Unfortunately the unexpected happened and Pandit Motilalji could not come. As the reasons given by him are of public importance, I set them forth in his own language.”6 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “Maulana Abul Kalam Azad informs me that the newspaper reports of my speech, before the European Association, the other day, has given rise to a great deal of controversy among the Mussalman friends and even some resentment, because some Mussalman friends read into my speech the view that I could not find an able and honourable Mussalman who could occupy the Mayoral chair, and that the Maulana Sahib also had given me a similar opinion. I have now read the report of my speech from which these deductions have been made. Though it is not a verbatim report, even as it stands, I do not consider that it warrants the deductions that have been drawn from it.”7

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “Maulana Abul Kalam Azad has very considerately sent me a copy of his Press message on the Hindu-Muslim question. He is one of the very few men who may be claimed to be sincerely desirous to attain unity. He has asked me to call a meeting of the Working Committee in order to consider the question. I am not doing so before the Congress week at Cawnpore because the annual function is too near to warrant an earlier meeting of the Working Committee. I wish the Committee could discover a solution of the problem. But I must frankly confess that I despair. That is not to say that I despair of a solution altogether. I despair of the Congress discovering and enforcing a solution. Let us not conceal from ourselves the truth that the Congress does not represent the fighters in either camp. Not till those unseen ones who are behind the fighters are under the Congress influence and the newspaper editors who are fomenting dissensions are either converted to the unity doctrine or cease to have any influence, can the Congress do any useful work in the direction of unity. My bitter experience has taught me that they who take the name of unity mean disunion. The atmosphere around us is as false as was the atmosphere in Europe at the time of the last War. The newspapers never told the truth. The representatives of their respective nations had made of laying a fine art. All was fair in War. The old formula of Jehovah thirsting for the blood even of children was revived in all its nakedness. And so it is today in what may be called a miniature war between Hindus and Muslims. We may lie and cheat for saving our faiths. This has been said to me not by one mouth but many. This, however, is no cause for the slightest despair. I know that the demon of disunion is at his last gasp. A lie has no bottom. Disunion is a lie. Even if it is sheer self-interest, it will bring about unity. I had hoped for disinterested unity. But I will welcome a unity based even on mutual interest. Only it will not come in the way suggested by the Maulana Saheb. It will come, when it does come, in a way perhaps least expected by us. God is the Master Trickster. He knows how to confound us, frustrate our ‘knavish tricks’. He sends death when one least expects it. He sends life when we see no sign of it. Let us admit our abject helplessness, let us own that we are utterly defeated. Out of the dust of our humility will, I feel sure, be built up an impregnable citadel of unity. I am sorry I am unable to return a more encouraging answer to the Maulana’s appeal. Let him take comfort from the fact that I share his desire for union with the same intensity that he will credit himself with. What does it matter if I feel unable to share his faith in his plan of achieving unity? I shall do nothing to hinder it. I shall pray for the success of every sincere effort in that direction. My ceasing to fret does not mean the unity is no longer an article of my creed. Let me re-declare my undying faith in it. For the sake of it I must renounce the privilege of being a maker of the unity that is coming. I have the wisdom to stand aside and wait when my interference can only disturb the wound without healing.”8

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “It was received after the All-India Congress Committee session was over. But do you think that any purpose can be served by calling a special session of the Congress? It can be of use only when there is a policy or programme that requires confirmation by it. But unfortunately we have neither policy nor programme. On the contrary, the tallest among us distrust one another and even where there is no distrust there is no agreement as to facts or opinion. In the circumstances a Congress session can only accentuate the existing depression. It seems to me that time alone can solve the difficulty which seems to baffle us. I wish that it was possible for us at least to devise means of ascertaining the causes and of defining the results of each riot. But it seems that we have become incapacitated even for this very simple work.”9 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “At the request of Maulana Shaukat Ali I prepared a draft of the non-co-operation resolution in the train. Up to this time I had more or less avoided the use of the word non-violent in my drafts. I invariably made use of this word in my speeches. My vocabulary on the subject was still in process of formation. I found that I could not bring home my meaning to purely Muslim audiences with the help of the Sanskrit equivalent for non-violent. I therefore asked Maulana Abul Kalam Azad to give me some other equivalent for it. He suggested the word ba-aman; similarly for non-co-operation he suggested the phrase tark-i-mavalat.”10

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “Of course I shall gladly see the Governor during my stay in Calcutta and do whatever is possible. Dr. Bidhan wrote to me two days ago. The fast had to come. Such was God’s will. So long as He desires service from me, I shall be unhurt. I reach their 19th morning.”11 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “Maulana Abul Kalam Azad once said that the whole country was a gurudwara. That very moment it occurred to me that the whole country was a prison. And the States are doubly so. The facilities available in the States are those available in a jail.”12 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “If you have seen the enclosed I would like you’re considered opinion on the points raised therein. Is such conversion valid in Islam? Is the method adopted lawful? Is the way the thing is being advertised lawful or permissible? Will you publish your opinion or permit me to publish it?”13 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “I have accepted Maulana Abul Kalam Azad as my guide. My suggestion, therefore, to you is that conversation should be opened in the first instance as between you and Maulana Saheb. But in every case regard me as at your disposal.”14

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “This learned company included, among several others, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and the late Maulana Abdul Bari. Led by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad they held that belief in non-violence was not only inconsistent with Islam, but it was obligatory in the sense that Islam had always preferred it to violence. It is noteworthy that this took place before the acceptance of non-violence by the Congress in 1920. Many were the discourses given by learned Muslims on nonviolence before crowded Muslim meetings.”15 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “You shall address me as you like. I do not know that you addressed me differently. I have written to Lord Linlithgow as suggested by you. I quite agree with you about the Pattabhi episode. I am inclined to think that there should be a considered reply from you to the Lahore resolution.”16 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “I have had the privilege of being associated with Maulana Abul Kalam Azad in national work since 1920. In the knowledge of Islam he is surpasses by no one. He is a profound Arabic scholar. His nationalism is as robust as his faith in Islam. That he is today the supreme head of the Indian National Congress has deep meaning which should not be lost sight or by any student of Indian politics.”17

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “Whatever the Muslim League does or does not do, it behoves thoughtful Hindus to take note of the deserved taunt and purge Hinduism of its exclusiveness. It will not be protected by artificial barriers which have no sanction in ancient Hinduism or reason. Well did Maulana Abul Kalam Azad say the other day how sick he was of hearing the cry at railway stations of Hindu and Muslim tea or water? I know this touch-magnetism is deep-rooted in Hinduism as it is practiced today. But there is no reason why it should be tolerated by Congressmen. If they will be correct in their behaviour, they will pave the way for a radical transformation of Hindu society. The message of anti-untouchability does not end in merely touching the so-called untouchables. It has a much deeper meaning.”18 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “There is no need for you to feel unhappy because I have said that I am your faithful dog. That quadruped brother of ours possesses great nobility. According to the commentators the dog was Dharma personified. But if the Dog has become rabid, you can and should remove him. My advice to you now is that you should set right this mistake made by me. I have exceeded my authority as a general. Either rectifies the mistake I made in allowing Raja to have his resolution twisting the meaning of ahimsa or remove me. If you rectify the mistake I have a plan for future action.”19

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “In the course of discussion in the Working Committee, I discovered that I had committed a grave error in the interpretation of the Bombay Resolution. I had interpreted it to mean that the Congress was to refuse participation in the present or all wars on the ground principally of non-violence. I found to my astonishment that most members differed from my interpretation and held that the opposition need not be on the ground of non-violence. On rereading the Bombay Resolution I found that the differing members were right and that I had read into it a meaning which its letter could not bear. The discovery of the error makes it impossible for me to lead the Congress in the struggle for resistance to war effort on grounds in which nonviolence was not indispensable. I could not, for instance, identify myself with opposition to war effort on the ground of ill will against Great Britain. The resolution contemplated material association with Britain in the war effort as a price for guaranteed independence of India. If such was my view, and I believed in the use of violence for gaining independence and yet refused participation in the effort as the price of that independence, I would consider myself guilty of unpatriotic conduct. It is my certain belief that only non-violence can save India and the world from self-extinction. Such being the case, I must continue my mission whether I am alone or assisted by an organization or individuals. You will, therefore, please relieve me of the responsibility laid upon me by the Bombay Resolution. I must continue civil disobedience for free speech against all war with such Congressmen and others whom I select and who believe in the nonviolence I have contemplated and are willing to conform to prescribed conditions. I will not, at this critical period, select for civil disobedience those whose services are required to steady and help the people in their respective localities.”20

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “I will write to you only in Urdu. This time you will forgive me. I had already told you in Delhi that now my health do not permit me to move around. Moreover I do not have any work there and I have convened three meetings here which I must attend. People from faraway places have been invited. You will understand my position and excuse me for my absence.”21 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “After that I had a long talk with Rajendra Babu, Prafulla Babu and Dev. They gave news about Allahabad. In my opinion it is better that Sardar, etc. are allowed to leave the Committee. As it is the working of the present Committee hinders our work. It is not proper to insist on staying together. It is good that we remain together as far as possible but once a major difference of opinion emerges it is better that we part company amicably. Sardar and others also share this view. I had expressed this opinion to you even earlier. Experience has now confirmed it all the more. In my opinion you should accept the resignations of Sardar and five or six other members and form a new Committee. When it is clear that there are two factions within the Committee why should we pretend that there is only one? There is a vast difference between the resolution passed and the resolution I had sent. What I intended to tell the world through my resolution is missing here. Sardar tells me that the public opinion is in favour of my resolution. I do not think it necessary to convene a meeting of the Working Committee to clear the matter. In my opinion first we both should meet and it will be better still if Jawaharlal can join us. After that if you think proper you may convene a meeting of the Working Committee.”22

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “Since there was nothing particular to write I did not reply. However, the Sind affair is worrying me. Dr. Choithram, Prof. Ghanshyam and others have written to me. I have written to them that as long as they are in the Congress, they will have to do as you say. But for how long can they be held back? There are other issues too about which I am writing in Harijan. I hope you do read Harijan. I hope you will come here after you have recovered. Jawahar is coming tomorrow.”23 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “I depended first upon the decisive interpretation given by the President, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, and secondly on my own, meaning that the Jagat Narain Lal Resolution should be read together with the others bearing on the question. For these latter were not cancelled by the Jagat Narain Lal Resolution.”24

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “It was by mere chance that Pyarelal happened to see you. But what you told him, if his report of the talk is accurate, is startling. The Working Committee has not given you the right or the permission to form a cabinet. You yourself told me that you could not do it without the Working Committee. That is my view too. That was why I had said that you should form a small committee with the assistance of the Working Committee, which could be given that right and then act through that committee or the Working Committee itself. Since you did not react favorably to either of the proposals, I can only conclude that I do not understand or do not know the stand of the Working Committee in the matter. I understand from what Jamnalalji says that you are going to summon the Working Committee anyhow. I consider it improper. I would not wish you to be guilty of such a grave error at this juncture. I do not know what you have done and how you could persuade the Viceroy. Even if you have committed yourself it is, in my view, your duty to inform him that a mistake has been committed. So much for the matter between you and the Working Committee. Another thing I would like to tell you is that in anything you do, you should take with you the Congress who are present and you should put everything in writing. The third is a personal matter. Ever since I first heard the Viceroy’s proclamation, that is, while I was still at Panchgani, I have been shouting that the Congress cannot accept the principle of parity between Muslims and non-Harijan Hindus, an organization of Hindus alone. Even if I am the only one among crores to do so, I shall refuse to be a party to it. I do not care if the negotiations break down on this, for I know and believe that the moment you try to form a national government at the centre in this way you will be laying a wrong foundation. In this repect I am neither a Hindu, nor belong to any other religion. I belong to all faiths or to none. I only walk in the way shown by God. I shall be very happy if you can lend me your cooperation in this matter. But if you cannot do it wholeheartedly then I would rather do without it. I shall keep you informed. I trust you are well and the climate here has not disagreed with you.”25

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “I had asked Dr. Pattabhi. I did not feel it was right to say anything when I had only seen the newspaper. Now that I have received the letter I shall be writing something. I have seen the telegram Rajaji has sent you. I agree with it. I saw something in the Press by way of a directive from you about providing for the relatives of those who died during the struggle in 1942 and afterwards. The financial help we are at present giving to such relatives for their maintenance and education is something different. In my opinion if we go by truth and non-violence we cannot give such assistance. How can we say that all of them died for the country, that they sacrificed themselves for the cause of swaraj? I feel that under no circumstances can you do that. If I may advise you, I would ask you to withdraw the statement. I do not know whether there is still time for that. I am sending you a wire today. The other thing concerns Begum Azad. Dr. Khan Saheb mentioned the matter to me at Lahore. It pricked me. I am not aware of any public service rendered by Begum Azad. If what I believe is true, there should not be any public memorial in her name. Some persons came to me. I told them to do whatever they wanted. I did not have the courage to say anything more to them. But I can speak to you. I would advise you to issue a nice Press statement saying that since Begum Azad had not rendered any public service you would not like any public memorial in her name. If my advice does not appeal to you, you will please reject it. The love we hold for each other demands no less.”26

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “On receipt of your letter today, I sent you the following wire: “Your letter. I think it should not be published. Writing fully.” I do not infer from your letter that you are writing about my ‘Hindus’. Whatever you have in your heart has not come in your writing. But do not worry about it. When we meet next we will talk over it if you so desire. Whatever you want to say about the communal problem should not be said without consulting the Working Committee. I am also of the opinion that it would be better to be quiet. The party can give its opinion after consultation with you. They have a right to do so. Besides it is their duty. I differ from your opinion. I cannot say if I attach importance to the words ‘Hindu’ and ‘Mussalman’. Whatever the Congress does is a different thing. At one time I do not like ‘Hindu’ and at another time I do not like ‘Mussalman’. It means there cannot be either. All this needs pondering over. I do not feel the urge for doing anything early.”27

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “I am not happy to read in the newspapers about your ill health. It is not good that you should get temperature so often. Now the weather in the Punjab should be good. Perhaps the weather in the Frontier Province would be better than in Lahore. I think you need some rest. You seem to have done good work in the Punjab.”28 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “I really wish I had enough time to write Urdu in a beautiful hand. It will be good indeed if you can go somewhere for rest in the beginning of November. Of course work is always there but sometimes rest is essential for work and for doing more of it. Rajkumari will be reaching there today on her way to London with Dr. Sargent and Dr. Zakir Husain Saheb. Educationists from all over the world will be meeting in London. Dr. Sargent has convened this conference, and Rajkumari and Dr. Zakir Husain were invited by him. She was not at all keen on giving her name for the conference. She had discussed the matter with me. She will be able to meet others also in London. Sardar’s treatment is going on. I shall have to go to Bombay for five days.”29

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “What more shall I say about your health? The sooner you go somewhere for rest the better it will be for the country. You have sent three names for the Working Committee. It will be better if in this matter you consult the present members and then announce the names. I have an impression that the Congress will have to meet some time soon. In that case will it not be better if the vacancies are filled by fresh elections? But if they have to be filled now, I think the three names that you have sent are all right. However, the members will be the best judges.”30 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “Read the enclosed clippings. Whatever is written about me is without foundation. I have not expressed my opinion to anybody. When one or two members of the Committee asked me about it I told them that it is not proper to have the same president. In fact I feel unhappy that a Muslim should remain president at this juncture. If you agree with this view I would like you to read the enclosed clippings. You should issue a statement announcing that you do not wish to remain the president. It would be appropriate if some other person becomes the president. Badshah Khan’s name had already been proposed but I strongly opposed it. I even had a discussion with Badshah Khan. If my opinion were sought this time, I would prefer Jawaharlal. There are several reasons for it. I do not want to go into them.”31

Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “Lawrence told me last night that you had written to him suggesting some alterations in his letter and that he had sent you a reply. What is all this? I could not say much in the matter but I did not like it. I am perplexed. It looks like I shall have to go to Simla. The mind shrinks from the thought. I feel somewhere in some way we are committing a mistake. You must also consider what you intend to do after the British army withdraws. I cannot quite see what you could do. You have announced that the present Working Committee will continue till November and you will continue as president till then. If you must continue, it does not seem proper that you should do so by a ruling. Giving such a ruling seems to me dangerous thing to do. If it becomes a duty to continue this can be done only through fresh elections. This matter deserves consideration.”32 Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “I know you are in Calcutta in Dr. Bidhan Roy’s good and able hands. At this time you ought to be spared all the trouble from friends who seek your assistance and advice. But I thought that you would perhaps know the facts much more than anybody else and give truer guidance. Hence, this trouble. I have telegraphed to Jawaharlal, Sardar, the President of the Congress and Dr. Khan Saheb. I purposely refrained from sending a wire to you in Calcutta. This too will be delivered to you by hand. I have seen your statement to the Press about your acceptance of office in the Interim Government. It is quite good and I have not the slightest doubt that your presence in the Cabinet will be of great service at this very critical juncture. I hope you will make rapid and solid recovery. Please do not hurry over the treatment. A medical adviser is entitled to consideration from a patient. That he happens to be a close friend of the patient should prove no disqualification from title to consideration if only because consideration shown to a medical adviser is really consideration shown to oneself. About movement here I dare say you glance at the newspaper reports of my words at the prayer meetings. I have put myself on trial as to whether I am an exponent of true ahimsa or only ahimsa so called. I am not relying upon Pyarelal or Sushila for my Urdu work though I see them often enough. Pyarelal is with me today, this being the last of the fifth village within his beat. If I do not follow this rule, the whole superstructure will come to pieces and the distribution of the party in affected villages will be a mockery. Mahatma Gandhi wrote, “If the ahimsa about which I have written so much and which I have striven to realize in practice all these years does not answer in a crisis, it ceases to have any value in my eyes. Your affection prompts you to say that if only I were near you, all would be well. The truth however is that so long as I cannot make good here, I can be of no use anywhere.”33

References: