'Reports of administration for 1918 of divisions and districts of the occupied territories in Mesopotamia. Volume I' [‎77r] (158/470)

I have embodied in a note given as Appendix B. The working out of a system
took up much time, which might have been devoted to other work, and I add the
note to this report in the hope that it may save some trouble to other officers.
I am well aware of its defects, but it was difficult to gather accurate information
and impossible to foresee prices, and I had not the benefit of other officers’ experiencew
The procedure employed was worked out in conjunction with the D.A.Q.M.G.,
and was published in Area Orders. A department or formation requiring land
submits its requirements to the G.O.C. in detail, with a plan, if necessary, showing
exactly what is needed and what damage will be done to trees, irrigation channels,
&c. If the G.O.C. considers the proposals to be jprimd facie sound the matter is
referred to a committee consisting of an A.P.O., an Irrigation Officer, and a local
inhabitant, for assessment of compensation to be paid, and report to the G.O.C.,
who, having considered the cost, either allots the land or refuses sanction. In
urgent cases the G.O.C. permits entry into the land previous to the assessment of
compensation. This system has always worked extremely well. The principle of
assessment before occupation is most desirable, not only in order that the A.P.O.
and Irrigation Officer may submit any objections for the consideration of the
G.O.C., but also that the G.O.C. may know the cost of the proposal before according
sanction.
Compensation work has been heavy. The total number of compensation
statements, each of which includes numerous recipients of compensation, is 48, and
the total amount paid is Rs. 43,940/3/-.
(E) Miscellaneous : (1) Accounts .—A new system of revenue accounts has
been worked out and is now in course of introduction. In compiling it I was
fortunate in obtaining the assistance of Chaudri Nizam-ud-Din, late Treasury
Officer, while Lieut. Brown of the Financial Assistant’s Office subsequently
criticised the orders. These are contained in two circulars given as Appendix C.
The accounts at present are chaotic, the staff is untrained, while the Turkish system
in force might have been specially designed to defy any attempt at inspection or
audit. Little progress can be made with a system that lumps together slaughter
house receipts and bridge tolls, and records them jointly as kodah. This is an
actual instance.
(2) Mugharisji Lands .—I have already remarked on the number of villages in
the district. Nearly all of these are surrounded by date groves, which are
cultivated on special tenures. Many disputes about these groves have come before
me, and I have written a note on the subject, which is attached to this report as
Appendix D. The remarks therein contained are based on experience gained in
hearing disputes and by local inspection, and not only on conversation with Mallaks,
but the note is necessarily incomplete as regards this district, and certainly could
not be accepted without inquiry as applicable to any other. I trust, however, that
it may be of use as an indication of some points that need attention and as a means
of eliciting the experience and opinions of other officers.
(3) Case Work .—There are three principal classes of revenue cases, whether
the land in dispute is mugharisji or not, i.e., claims for a share of the profit, petitions
for a delimitation of boundaries, and petitions for a declaration of right. A petition
on the face of it may be any sort of a claim, but it nearly always resolves into one
of the kinds mentioned. With very rare exceptions, all cases were decided on the
basis of possession, and the party in possession of the land was confirmed therein.
It is clear that possession may be of various kinds; for exaipple, possession by a
cultivating fallah Arabic for ‘peasant’. It was used by British officials to refer to agricultural workers or to members of a social class employed primarily in agricultural labour. differs from that of a mallak. The principle appears to operate
hardly in some cases, but no other is practicable. All orders passed are of a
temporary nature, and hold good only till settlement. In State lands, other than
mugharisji holdings, I think no one has a legal right, though certain claims will,
doubtless, be recognised later on, and the lands be allotted permanently or tempo
rarily to'cultivators by the Revenue authorities. An aggrieved tapu owner can
always put forward at settlement with his claim to tapu rights, a claim for arrears
of profit, though whether such a claim will be entertained in another matter.
I am strongly of opinion that all disputes concerning agricultural land should
be disposed of by Political Officers in their capacity as Revenue Officers, and should
not come before" the Civil Courts. I have dealt with this question at some length
in a memorandum dated 24th June 1918 and addressed to the P.O. Hillah, an
extract from which is attached as Appendix E. The memorandum is concerned
mainly with the land other than gardens, but the considerations therein apply