PROVISION Otf BORROWING FACILITIES. 45 



this kind are likely to be successful ; the real value of the objections 

 which are sometimes urged against them, and the best mode of 

 meeting any difficulties to which their working may be exposed in 

 India. 



5. Hearing from Bembay that a number of native bankers in 

 Poona and Bombay were willing to give the scheme a favourable 

 reception, we communicated our proposals to the Government of Bombay 

 for consideration and opinion. That Government stated in reply that 

 the scheme was not impracticable, and that it was willing to try it 

 on a small scale, if the details could be successfully arranged. Two 

 syndicates of bankers had been formed, one in Bombay and the 

 other at Poona, which were each prepared to try the experiment if 

 the Government would accede to their conditions. The Govern- 

 ment of Bombay recommended us to accept the offer of the Poona 

 Committee, as their demands were more in accord with our original 

 proposals than those of the Bombay Committee. The Bombay Com- 

 mittee, among other things, asked for a monopoly of the agricultural 

 banking business throughout the Presidency, and for a Govern- 

 ment guarantee to its debentures. A further proposal has been made 

 by MR. JAVERI LAL YAJNIK to start a similar bank in Guzerat; 

 but his scheme has not yet been considered by the Bombay Govern- 

 ment, and we only mention it here in order to show that the experi- 

 ment has excited considerable interest. 



6. The Government of Bombay suggested that the experiment 

 might be confined to the Purandhar taluqa in the Poona district, and 

 reported that a sum of 6J lakhs would probably be required for the 

 preliminary liquidation of the debts of the cultivators. Voluntary 

 liquidation of the nature suggested by us was considered essential 

 to the scheme, and the Bombay Government agreed with us that 

 legal provision would be requisite in order to place the Government 

 advances in the position of first charges. At the close of the letter 

 the very important question was raised whether the whole of the 

 bank's dues should be regularly recovered by the revenue courts or 

 whether resort to this agency should be strictly confined to cases 

 of default. As it was eminently desirable that there should be 

 no misunderstanding on this important point, we explained our 

 'jdews to the Government of Bombay in our letter, No. 572, of 23rd 



May, 1883. We stated that the aid of the revenue court could not 

 be given to the bank except on proof that it had attempted to 



