Report on the Revised Settlement of the Jhang District of the Punjab, 1874-1880

· 1882 · Public domain (published pre-1930) · archive.org ↗

1satisfied that the indebtedness of the agricaltural classes is not dne to a

2want of moderation in the assessment of the land revonue ; but that,' on

3the contrary, when the margin of profit is the largest, and when, in

4consequence, the credit of the zamindar is the highest, then the

5temptation to raise loans is the greatest. " So long as a zamind&r

6has credit, so long," writes Mr. Steedman, " will he borrow ; and so long

7as he borrows shall we find our annual returns of land transfers slowly but

8surely and steadily increasing."

9In para. 169 Mr. Steedman writes thus : — " Our system of revenne

10collection is to some (9xtent answerable for agricultural debt, but the real

11and true cause of all our woe was the mistaken and misplaced gift of fall

12transferable proprietary right in land to the cultivator, and with it ' of ja

13vast credit only limited by the value of that proprietary right." The

14svstem of revenue collectio7iy to which Mr. Steedman alludes, is presumably"

15tne substitution of cash assessments for collections in kind. On this point

16all that Colonel McMahon thinks he need say is that we could not now

17go back to a system of collecting the Government land revenue by* a

18share of the produce in kind ; and it is doubtful whether the people would

19really wish to make this reversion if it were optional with them to do so.

20In regard to Mr. Steedman's further remark, Colonel Wace writes that

21he is unable to agree with the Settlement Officer in thinking '^ that the

22conferment of proprietary right has probably not benefited the land-

23holders ;" nor does Colonel Wace see " how we could possibly have suc-

24ceeded in making such a settlement of the land as would have prevented

25the holders from borrowing money on it ; " for " good government makes

26the land valuable, and gives the holders an established title to it."

27Colonel Wace then sums up Mr. Steedman^s views as follows : — " €U)veni-

28ment policy of granting zaminddrs full proprietary rights with a light

29assessment has mainly contributed to the indebtedness of the agricultuHkl

30classes." Put in this way, the Settlement Officer's position may seem

31ridiculous ; but the Officiating Financial Commissioner apprehends that

32what Mr. Steedman views with reprehension is not our having given to

33zamindars a lightassessment,agoodtitle,and a firm hold upon the land ; Ixit

34the fact that with these we have also given them the power to alienate to

35those who are not their heirs in satisfaction for past debts or fop iilie

36supply of present needs or extravagance. Mr. Steedman thinks that wo

37would have done better had we, instead of conferring full proprietaxy

38rights on the members of village communities, giyen to . them rights erf

39occupancy only and denied them the right of alienation. The title he

40would have created would have been something analogous to the English.

41estate in tail. His argument is that if the money-leoder knew that the

42zamind&r could not alienate his land, loans would be limited to' what could

43be repaid from current income ; so that with the loss of credit thie growing

44indebtedness of the agricultural community would cease. The Officiating

45Financial Commissioner presumes that this system would also entail the

46prohibition of the sale of land in execution of decrees. The question

47whether land ought to be so sold is one which belongs rather to -the Oivil

48Procedure Code than to the settlement of land revenue. In the days before

49the Chief Court the rule was not to sell a zamind&r's fields in executif3tt»j