PUNJAUB REVOLT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 46, Issue 14129, 29 May 1920, Page 5

PUNJAUB REVOLT.

DYER’S METHODS.

A WEAK DEFENCE. Press Association— Electric Telegraph-Copyright (Australian and N .Z. Cable Association.) (Received Saturday, 8.50 a.m.) LONDON, Friday. General Sir Aloore Creagh, a former commander-in-chief of the Indian army, commenting on the Committee’s Amritsar report, said that it would be found that it would further alienate India, which was seething with sedition and Bolshevism. Every rascal will consider himself justified in adopting a policy of assassination. The Hunter Committee was formed of estimable gentlemen, but they do not know India. If Dyer had committed a breach of tho military law he should have been courtniartialled.

General Creagh is convinced that the shooting was essential. The Committee’s contention that Dyer should have read the Riot Act was .ridiculous. In -what language would ho have read it ? Was a brigade commander to summon professors and have the law translated? There are hundreds of religions in India all advocating vengeance. Forgiveness is next to non-existent. No doubt the rebels will be told that the British are afraid to shoot them. The people in England are unaware of the goingson in India, but will soon learn. The authorities who were informed ought to be left alone. Conciliation was out of the question. Drastic action was essential.