Page:Indian Journal of Economics Volume 2.djvu/552

 E. V. SUeDARAM REDDY before leading nonofficials in some direct or indirect maD net, so that the views of those concerned might be most readily ascertained ". With regard to Mr. Keatinge's proposed bill he would recommend a system of nomination by the holder of impartible land as to who his successor should be ; and in the event of no nomination being .made by s person during his life time he would propose that in order to obviate the evils of litigation which would weigh most heavily upon such small proprietors the selec- tion o! s successor to the vacant piece of land might be left to some local tribunal preferably to the village psnchsyst. While the former part of this recommendation is likely to be accepted by all, including those who may st present oppose the bill as s very desirable change in it, the latter does not seem to me to be s very desirable provision for adoption, as it carries with it the danger of injustice being done unless the psnchsysts are such as may ,be expected to administer such s duty justJy. He is of opinion that if the measure is st necessary, it would have to be made compulsory after obtaining the concurrence of a persons among those concerned. certain number of It is unnecessary for me to .consider at pr. esen, t various objections raised against Mr. Keatlnges same lines What exactly adopt may be consideration of the question. at present though it strongly of these evils proposed legislation. They run on more or less the as those urged against it elsewhere. is the legislation that it is desirable to determined upon, after very careful The material available points to the existence in an intense form is not sufficient to determine what remedial measure is suitable for any particular locality. The preliminary of a detailed ! Though Mr. Ketinge's Bill does not contain such & spsoifio provision, olmes lO, 16 amcl 18 read together oonta,tn such & provision imldioitly.