'Reports of administration for 1918 of divisions and districts of the occupied territories in Mesopotamia. Volume I' [‎185v] (375/470)

352
For list of 8a"duns and Shaikhs who draw a monthly subsidy from Government
see Appendix U. (This does not include salaries of Mudirs.)
For fuller details as to affairs of individual tribes see Appendices M., N.,
O., and P. for Suq, Shatrah, Qahat Sikar and Nasiriyah respectively.
For names of tribes forming each subdivisional area see Appendix V.
3. Revenue.— The Revenue for the Division, I am pleased to report, is
growing rapidly. The following figures show in round numbers the revenue takings
from all sources for the subdivisions during 1918. For fuller details please see
Appendices M., N., 0. and P. under A.P.O.’s reports, where they are dealt with at
length.
1917-18. 1918-19. Increase. Expected 1919.
Nasiriyah
Suq
Shatrah -
QaTat Sikar
Rs.
6,61,461/-
49,487/-
Nil
Nil
Rs.
7,28,429/-
3,42,769/-*
36,820/-*
3,970/-*
Rs.
66,968/-
2,93,282/-
36,820/-
3,970/-
Rs.
2,38,000/-
4,18,990/-
2,43,940/-
2,23,750/-
Nasiriyah. —This district generally will not for some time be a good Revenue
paying subdivision, as the surrounding tribal country (Azairij, Ibrahim, and
Hassunah), once very rich, has now become practically a desert owing mainly to
the Gharraf rivers drying up and taking another course above Shatrah. (See note
on Khafajah tribe and on irrigation, Appendix N.)
Date Revenue. —Owing to the comparatively few date gardens in the area
Rs. 30,000/- per annum will probably be the outside that can be taken for some
years to come.
Rice Revenue. —Nil.
Wheat and Barley—Wi\\ be doubled in 1919. For 1918 it was considered
advisable politically to collect one-tenth only, whereas one-fifth is the proper
demand. The one-tenth rate was taken throughout Nasiriyah and Suq district,
as it was the first time such revenue demand has been made for many vears, and
it was thought advisable by the D.O.F. Basrah to enforce our demand gradually.
Kodak Revenue (Sheep and Buffalo Tax) is to be taken in 1919 and should
realise a further Rs. 50,000/-.
Suq al Shuyukh. It is very pleasing to be able to report the progress that is
being made in this subdivision. During 1916—1917 only the very smallest
demands were made on the tribes, and these practically only on date-trees. The
disturbed state generally of the Muntafiq tribes (more specially those round Suq),
and the fact that they had never paid revenue to the Turks for the previous 15 to
20 years, made its re-introduction a very delicate matter indeed. In 1916 and 1917
the G.O.C. Euphrates hront, General Sir G. Brooking, K.C.B., issued orders that
no revenue whatsoever was to be taken on cereals. This was a wise move, as probably
any attempts at its collection would have resulted in armed resistance and possibly
open rebellion. In this connection 4 would refer to Suq Administration
Report for 1916—1/. Its perusal will show what great strides have been made
in Revenue collection since then. During 1918 there has been a thorough count
of all Suq date-trees. This, in itself, was a great triumph for the local A.P.O.
Beyond a little opposition, the count was done without the need for armed force,
beyond a gunboat which was placed at A.P.O.’s disposal to overawe any objectors.
Shitwi or Wheat and Barley Revenue for 1918 was taken at one-tenth rate as
above mentioned. Ibis again will be increased during 1919, and so Revenue from
this source will be doubled, probably trebled, during the coming year
Rice should bring in about the same yield next year as this. The demand
was purposely on the small side, because of the fact that one has still to depend
on the iniquitous Kharas, or estimation system. One knows this system invariably
cheats Government of its proper dues, but any attempt to induce the “ Khawaris ”
or estimators to improve their figures at once results in the universal cry that
Government is pressing unduly on the cultivators. We can do nothing better,
however, until a proper large-scale survey is made of the whole country, and Revenue
* These are “ P rocess of collection. The figures quoted do not include municipal revenues^