whole value of the reforms were put.  The atmosphere of the Assembly was never again so tense as when the crucial debate was opened by one of the ablest of the younger members of the Moderate party, Mr. Jamnadas Dwarkadas, from Bombay, on the administration of martial law in the Punjab in 1919.  He asked the Government (1) to declare its adhesion to the principle of equal partnership for Indian and European in the British Empire; (2) to express regret that martial law in the Punjab violated this fundamental principle; (3) to administer deterrent punishment to officers guilty of an improper exercise of their powers including the withdrawal of their pensions; (4) to assure itself that adequate compensation is awarded to those who lost their relatives at the Jallianwala Bagh and elsewhere.  The speaker moved his Resolution with great firmness and power but also with great self-restraint.  Most of the Indian speeches in support of it were conceived in much the same spirit, though now and again one got a glimpse of angrier passions just beneath the surface.  Happily the Government of India responded for the first time with the frankness and generosity which, had it displayed them in a much earlier stage in its handling of the Punjab troubles, would have averted many of the worst consequences.  By reprobating, either implicitly or explicitly, the worst abuses of martial law the Home member, Sir William Vincent, the Commander-in-chief, Lord Rawlinson, and Sir Godfrey Fell on behalf of the army administration, succeeded in persuading the Assembly that not only were methods of humiliation and terrorism absolutely repugnant to all traditions of British rule, but that the censure and punishment already inflicted upon officers and officials were in reality far more serious and effective than the Indian mind had been wont to believe.  Indian members were asked to realise that for a British officer a broken career is virtually the end of life, and Sir Godfrey Fell had no need to mention General Dyer’s name when he said, “As it was put to me the other day by a very distinguished general officer, to leave the army in these circumstances would be to many officers a disgrace worse than death.”  Government finally accepted the Resolution as it had been moved with the exception of the third clause asking for further punishment—­a question which it was not prepared nor in a position to reopen.  With the eager approval of a great many of his Indian colleagues the mover withdrew that clause and the rest of the Resolution was passed unanimously and, be it noted, with the support of every European member of the Assembly.