DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.68025#0140
Mr. F. W.
Duke.
3 Jan., 1908.
134 MINUTES OF evidence:
can get a fresh allotment of funds. Does that diffi-
culty occur now, or is it a difficulty of past days ?—It
has not been entirely removed. Government is at this
moment attempting to remove it. I have no expe-
rience yet of a sufficient provincial allotment having
been given to enable all works, which ought to be
carried on, to continue. I had occasion in July last to
give local instructions as to how far the difficulty
might be met, by pointing out what classes of works
should be carried on with a provisional allotment, as
everything could not go on.
17707. You find that the present system does hamper
you considerably ?—Upto date we are still hampered.
I do not say that it causes loss of money ; it causes
loss of annual profit, when the works are profitable
works and their execution is deferred.
17708. To construct a new work have you to bring
a great deal of labour to the spot ?—I was not think-
ing of works in which you have much trouble in
obtaining labour ; I was thinking of local improve-
ments.
17709. There has been already some delegation of
powers to Commissioners in Bengal?—A. very con-
siderable delegation.
17710. Have you, as a Commissioner, power to dele-
gate to your District Officers ?—There are some
matters in which by rule I have power to delegate ;
as a rule it is not optional to the Commissioner to
delegate duties.
17711. In those cases in which you have power, do
you exercise that power ?—It is difficult for me to give
instances ; I have done so in some matters in respect
to Road Cess.
17712. You have not at all events exercised your
full powers of delegation?—I have never refused to
exercise any power of delegation that I can think of.
17713. Have you ever on your own initiative exer-
cised any power of delegation ?—The Commissioner
cannot delegate his own powers. He can sanction the
delegation of various powers by Collectors to Deputy
Collectors, and that is frequently done.
17714. With regard to the Courts of Wards, we had
it in evidence yesterday that there was an attempt on
the part of the Board of Revenue to take possession
unduly frequently of estates, the proprietors or
trustees of which would rather have remained outside
the operations of the Court of Wards ; have you
noticed any such tendency in the divisions with which
you have been connected ?—My opinion is entirely the
other way, that there is a reluctance on the part of
the revenue authorities to burden themselves with
estates ; but it is quite possible that few estates are
taken over without some one opposing it ; as a rule, if
there are any ladies of the previous generation, they
are usually advised to oppose it, or they oppose it of
their own motion.
17715. Is there an undue desire on the part of the
Board of Revenue to take possession of estates? —
There is certainly not an undue desire, and I am
inclined to think that there is rather an undue re-
luctance sometimes to take up estates, because they are
not considered sufficiently important.
17716. You are not in favour of curtailing the right
of appeal ?—No, it would be a very unpopular thing
to do ; I do not think it is necessary.
17717. You think that the appellate authorities are
perhaps not very careful to go into the full facts of
the cases which come to them on appeal ?—My objec-
tion is that the complaint of the abuse of appeal is
often caused by appeals being taken up unnecessarily,
by reason that the initial duty of examining the appeal
and deciding whether there is a primA facie case is
not discharged with sufficient care, so that appeals are
brought up for a full hearing which might more properly
have been thrown out on the face of them or after some
preliminary examination, instead of compelling both
parties to come up and be heard at full length and at
great expense.
17718. You think that a little preliminary care in
this matter might reduce the bulk of the work ?—It
might reduce the bulk of the work and it would be
better for the parties.
17719. Is the size of the districts generally too large
in Bengal ?—I do not think so, generally.
17720. If there is an over-press of work would it be
best relieved by the increased appointment of Joint-
Magistrates?—Except to some of the Sadar sub-
divisions.
17721. If far larger powers—certainly all such
powers as you and your Collectors and a Sub-Divisional
Officer could properly exercise—were given, would
there still be any necessity of increasing the staff ?—-If
much extended powers were given the staff would have
to be increased. The staff which I require to be in-
creased is the staff at the bottom, the sub-divisional
staff ; officers for the Sadar sub-divisions of districts
are vhry badly required, and that cannot be met by
reduction of the staff elsewhere.
17722. If the number of cases which the Divisional
Officer and the District Officer could dispose of them-
selves were increased, would that not greatly reduce
the correspondence ?—It would reduce ministerial work,
both upwards and downwards.
17723. Would that not by itself afford the relief
which you seek ?—It would not relieve the superior
staff to any great extent ; there would be far more
work for disposal by the most numerous portion of
the superior staff, that is to say, the Magistrates and
Assistant Magistrates, and their work and responsi-
bility would be increased ; the actual clerical work of
the staff might be reduced.
17724. You might increase a man’s responsibility
without increasing his. work?—Not unless you took
away work from him to somewhere else.
17725. You do not suggest any increased power to
municipalities or District Boards ?—No. Their powers
are large enough if they were fully utilised—par-
ticularly in the case of municipalities ; not so much
in the case of District Boards. The municipalities can
rarely exercise their powers without increased taxation
which they have to impose upon themselves ; they are
slow to adopt improvements which will lead to a
re-assessment of the existing taxes or to the imposi-
tion of new taxes, such as a water or lighting rate ;
they would rather go on as they are than accept fresh
burdens.
17726. The municipalities would not, as a matter of
fact, use any extended powers which they might have ?
—That is to’ some extent the case, or at least there
would be reluctance.
17727. With regard to villages, do you suggest that
they would probably be incapable of utilizing further
powers ?—I do not suggest that at all. Although the
existing union committees in Bengal have not suc-
ceeded very well, some of them have succeeded fairly-
I still think that they might be developed. There is
always the difficulty about taxation ; it is impossible to
provide them with any adequate funds without fresh
taxation, and even if they were given the power I do
not think they would wish to tax themselves ; but the
village union system might be nursed up and developed,
and it is the only chance of establishing real local self-
government.
17728. In any movement which was made in that
direction, you would desire to begin at the bottom and
not with the District Board ?—That is my view, that we
ought to build up.
17729. (Mr. Meyer f) With regard to the Tenancy
Act, are not the Regulations in force for Orissa dif-
ferent from those in the rest of the province?—Yes,
in many respects.
17730. Is there too great a tendency to apply one
law to the whole province?—I do not profess to be
specially an expert in the Tenancy Act, because my
experience in Bihar was comparatively limited ; but I
think that the Tenancy Act principles have been ap-
plied rather too strenuously and somewhat unfairly to
Orissa. I think the Tenancy Act was originally
drafted and passed in view of certain conditions
existing in Bihar.
17731. Do you refer to the Tenancy Act of 1885 ?—
Yes ; some of the principles regulating the relations of
landlords and tenants may have been perfectly suitable
in Bihar, but were somewhat too stringent for the
easier conditions that prevailed in Orissa.
17732. Speaking generally, your present province is
made up of three or four areas which in many respects
differ from one another—in language and ethno-
graphically and otherwise ?—That is so.
Duke.
3 Jan., 1908.
134 MINUTES OF evidence:
can get a fresh allotment of funds. Does that diffi-
culty occur now, or is it a difficulty of past days ?—It
has not been entirely removed. Government is at this
moment attempting to remove it. I have no expe-
rience yet of a sufficient provincial allotment having
been given to enable all works, which ought to be
carried on, to continue. I had occasion in July last to
give local instructions as to how far the difficulty
might be met, by pointing out what classes of works
should be carried on with a provisional allotment, as
everything could not go on.
17707. You find that the present system does hamper
you considerably ?—Upto date we are still hampered.
I do not say that it causes loss of money ; it causes
loss of annual profit, when the works are profitable
works and their execution is deferred.
17708. To construct a new work have you to bring
a great deal of labour to the spot ?—I was not think-
ing of works in which you have much trouble in
obtaining labour ; I was thinking of local improve-
ments.
17709. There has been already some delegation of
powers to Commissioners in Bengal?—A. very con-
siderable delegation.
17710. Have you, as a Commissioner, power to dele-
gate to your District Officers ?—There are some
matters in which by rule I have power to delegate ;
as a rule it is not optional to the Commissioner to
delegate duties.
17711. In those cases in which you have power, do
you exercise that power ?—It is difficult for me to give
instances ; I have done so in some matters in respect
to Road Cess.
17712. You have not at all events exercised your
full powers of delegation?—I have never refused to
exercise any power of delegation that I can think of.
17713. Have you ever on your own initiative exer-
cised any power of delegation ?—The Commissioner
cannot delegate his own powers. He can sanction the
delegation of various powers by Collectors to Deputy
Collectors, and that is frequently done.
17714. With regard to the Courts of Wards, we had
it in evidence yesterday that there was an attempt on
the part of the Board of Revenue to take possession
unduly frequently of estates, the proprietors or
trustees of which would rather have remained outside
the operations of the Court of Wards ; have you
noticed any such tendency in the divisions with which
you have been connected ?—My opinion is entirely the
other way, that there is a reluctance on the part of
the revenue authorities to burden themselves with
estates ; but it is quite possible that few estates are
taken over without some one opposing it ; as a rule, if
there are any ladies of the previous generation, they
are usually advised to oppose it, or they oppose it of
their own motion.
17715. Is there an undue desire on the part of the
Board of Revenue to take possession of estates? —
There is certainly not an undue desire, and I am
inclined to think that there is rather an undue re-
luctance sometimes to take up estates, because they are
not considered sufficiently important.
17716. You are not in favour of curtailing the right
of appeal ?—No, it would be a very unpopular thing
to do ; I do not think it is necessary.
17717. You think that the appellate authorities are
perhaps not very careful to go into the full facts of
the cases which come to them on appeal ?—My objec-
tion is that the complaint of the abuse of appeal is
often caused by appeals being taken up unnecessarily,
by reason that the initial duty of examining the appeal
and deciding whether there is a primA facie case is
not discharged with sufficient care, so that appeals are
brought up for a full hearing which might more properly
have been thrown out on the face of them or after some
preliminary examination, instead of compelling both
parties to come up and be heard at full length and at
great expense.
17718. You think that a little preliminary care in
this matter might reduce the bulk of the work ?—It
might reduce the bulk of the work and it would be
better for the parties.
17719. Is the size of the districts generally too large
in Bengal ?—I do not think so, generally.
17720. If there is an over-press of work would it be
best relieved by the increased appointment of Joint-
Magistrates?—Except to some of the Sadar sub-
divisions.
17721. If far larger powers—certainly all such
powers as you and your Collectors and a Sub-Divisional
Officer could properly exercise—were given, would
there still be any necessity of increasing the staff ?—-If
much extended powers were given the staff would have
to be increased. The staff which I require to be in-
creased is the staff at the bottom, the sub-divisional
staff ; officers for the Sadar sub-divisions of districts
are vhry badly required, and that cannot be met by
reduction of the staff elsewhere.
17722. If the number of cases which the Divisional
Officer and the District Officer could dispose of them-
selves were increased, would that not greatly reduce
the correspondence ?—It would reduce ministerial work,
both upwards and downwards.
17723. Would that not by itself afford the relief
which you seek ?—It would not relieve the superior
staff to any great extent ; there would be far more
work for disposal by the most numerous portion of
the superior staff, that is to say, the Magistrates and
Assistant Magistrates, and their work and responsi-
bility would be increased ; the actual clerical work of
the staff might be reduced.
17724. You might increase a man’s responsibility
without increasing his. work?—Not unless you took
away work from him to somewhere else.
17725. You do not suggest any increased power to
municipalities or District Boards ?—No. Their powers
are large enough if they were fully utilised—par-
ticularly in the case of municipalities ; not so much
in the case of District Boards. The municipalities can
rarely exercise their powers without increased taxation
which they have to impose upon themselves ; they are
slow to adopt improvements which will lead to a
re-assessment of the existing taxes or to the imposi-
tion of new taxes, such as a water or lighting rate ;
they would rather go on as they are than accept fresh
burdens.
17726. The municipalities would not, as a matter of
fact, use any extended powers which they might have ?
—That is to’ some extent the case, or at least there
would be reluctance.
17727. With regard to villages, do you suggest that
they would probably be incapable of utilizing further
powers ?—I do not suggest that at all. Although the
existing union committees in Bengal have not suc-
ceeded very well, some of them have succeeded fairly-
I still think that they might be developed. There is
always the difficulty about taxation ; it is impossible to
provide them with any adequate funds without fresh
taxation, and even if they were given the power I do
not think they would wish to tax themselves ; but the
village union system might be nursed up and developed,
and it is the only chance of establishing real local self-
government.
17728. In any movement which was made in that
direction, you would desire to begin at the bottom and
not with the District Board ?—That is my view, that we
ought to build up.
17729. (Mr. Meyer f) With regard to the Tenancy
Act, are not the Regulations in force for Orissa dif-
ferent from those in the rest of the province?—Yes,
in many respects.
17730. Is there too great a tendency to apply one
law to the whole province?—I do not profess to be
specially an expert in the Tenancy Act, because my
experience in Bihar was comparatively limited ; but I
think that the Tenancy Act principles have been ap-
plied rather too strenuously and somewhat unfairly to
Orissa. I think the Tenancy Act was originally
drafted and passed in view of certain conditions
existing in Bihar.
17731. Do you refer to the Tenancy Act of 1885 ?—
Yes ; some of the principles regulating the relations of
landlords and tenants may have been perfectly suitable
in Bihar, but were somewhat too stringent for the
easier conditions that prevailed in Orissa.
17732. Speaking generally, your present province is
made up of three or four areas which in many respects
differ from one another—in language and ethno-
graphically and otherwise ?—That is so.