Mohan Malaviya whose statements made in the Council have almost all now been proved to be true out of the mouths of official witnesses themselves. He expressed such a callous indifference to popular feelings and betrayed such criminal want of imagination that he would not postpone death sentences pronounced by the Martial Law tribunal, except after he was forced to do so by the Secretary of State Cor India. He seems to have closed his heart against further light by shutting out questions by a responsible member of the Council like Pundit Madan Mohan Malaviya. He would not visit the Punjab for local inquiry. We refrain from criticising his attitude over the Rowlatt agitation. But a sense of public safety forbids us to ignore His Excellency's inability to appreciate and deal with the situation in April. Whilst, therefore, ve do not think His Excellency has wil- fully neglected the interests of those who were entrusted to his charge by His Majesty, we regret to say that H. E. Lord Chelmsford has pi oved himself incapable of holding the high office to which he was called, and we are of opinion that His Excellency should be re-called.
We summarise below our other conclusions: The people of the Punjab were incensed against Sir M. O'Dwyer's administration by reason of his studied con- tempt and distrust of the educated classes, and by the iea~ son of the cruel and compulsory methods adopted during the war for obtaining recruits and monetary contributions and by his suppression of public opinion, by gagging the local press and shutting out Nationalist newspapers from outside the Punjab.
The Rowlatt agitation disturbed the public mind and
shocked confidence in the goodwill of the Government.
This was shared by the Punjab in a fuller measure, perhaps,
than el sewhere, because of the use made by Sir Michael
�� �
