Stuk 8 - Memorandum from Edwin Montagu to Sir William Duke

The telegram drafted by Seton does not express his view. When the Hunter Committee reports it will be necessary to act promptly, so he wants to let the Viceroy know his thoughts in advance. It is clear that officers administering martial law have felt themselves free to devise what punishments they like, and he wishes to guard against this in future and to warn the Viceroy that, though he is prepared to wait before taking action, they must have recommenda-tions ready. He does not wish to suggest that he would be satisfied with any action consistent with the principles mentioned in Hailey’s report, and objects particularly to the suggestion that flogging is the best punishment for minor breaches of martial law. The suggestion that the social status of the offender should be taken into account will is unlikely to meet the approval of the Commons. He wishes to know the Viceroy’s views on the whipping of schoolboys, and what his draft instructions are to be. Acknowledges that he referred inaccurately to A2/23/1 in A2/23/2. Responds to A2/23/3a, observing that the objectionable punishments were not inflicted by courts but by individual officers, and that he is not prepared to leave them to be checked only by their military superiors; the use of cages for imprisonment and the humiliation inflicted on Indians by racial orders will have a more lasting effect than bloodshed. Decries Hose’s reference to the crawling order as a ‘traffic regulation’ and denies that most of the punishments were regular and authorised. He thinks, however, that it would be difficult and dangerous to hold individuals responsible for particular acts, and is more concerned to prevent a recurrence. Even if the Hunter Commission condemns the acts, there should be no ‘head hunting’.

(Typed.)