240 



of the landholder." In forwarding this report to the Court 

 of Wards Mr. Horsfall, the Collector, noted by way of com- 

 ment : " The system is profitable, no doubt, to the Zemin- 

 dar, but faulty and oppressive in the extreme. No tenant is 

 secure of his tenure for more than the period of his lease, and 

 any improvements that he may have effected during the 

 period of tenure are turned against him and made the reason 

 for raising his rent ; should he not agree, his lands are given 

 to another, and he is ousted. Besides this, under the system 

 of joint liability, he was held responsible for land with which 

 he had really nothing to do. It is by a system like this that the 

 rents have been doubled f during the past 10 years. Should 

 no one be willing to pay the price demanded, the lands were 

 included under Kamatam or home farm lands. The conditions 

 speak for themselves." Mr. Wynch who was also in charge 

 of this estate writes in 1890 : " No remissions are granted 

 for lands left waste or for loss of crop {vide condition of 

 puttah) ; if the tenant does not pay the rent in full, it re- 

 mains in the accounts as an arrear against him ; and this 

 system of never writing arrears off the accounts is productive 

 of the greatest oppression. Payments are credited to arrears, 

 in order that the right to distrain for the current arrears may 

 be kept alive. If this is not done and if the tenant cannot 

 obviously pay the arrears accumulated against him, — for it 

 is observed that they run on from generation to generation 

 — and supposing that one tenant dies or deserts his holding, 

 the incoming tenant is made to bind himself to pay the 

 arrears due against the holding ; then a bond will be taken 

 from the tenant, conditioned for the repayment of the whole 

 debt, with interest, by instalments within perhaps 12 or 20 

 years or more, as the circumstances require; if default is 

 made in payment of any two consecutive instalments the 

 whole amount of the bond immediately becomes due." As 

 regards the relative condition of Government and Zeraindari 

 ryots, Mr. Subbarayudu writes in 1879 : " There is no doubt 

 that the estate ryot is poorer than the Government ryot. 

 The reason is to be found in the difference of sist and the 

 difference of administration. Before the expiry of the cowle 

 there can be no alteration of sist, but after it the Zemindar 

 is at liberty to enhance it. Under Government besides occa- 

 sional remissions, arrears are written off as irrecoverable 

 after lapse of some time ; and the ryot is annually allowed to 

 relinquish lands which he cannot pay for. These privileges 

 are not conceded to the Zemindari tenant. Unless the 

 agreement is executed for the rich and poor lands together, 

 no fresh lease is granted on the expiry of a leaGe. The poor 



