753
payment by the perpetual lessee who may deduct the whole amount paid from what he owes to his tax lord. The tax lords resent this rule very strongly, and I have received repeated representations from them on the subject. The eldest of the Tangs of Kam Tin have drawn up at my request a statement (marked A) which I attach.
very fairly from the tax lord's point of view; they claim to be the owners of the Land and to be treated as such by the Government.
8. There would seem however to be very serious objections to putting in the tax lord as owner of the land.
First of all he does not know the land and he will begin by asking the Government to find it for him.
Secondly he is not the full owner and never really had full ownership. He would not at any time have succeeded in turning out the cultivator and of recent years it seems probable that his hold on the cultivator has been gradually weakening.
Thirdly if we turn out the cultivator we have to face the question who we are to put in his place.
The rent charge owner who receives something substantial? or the tax payer who has only the most nominal interest in the land. (see paragraph 7 at A)
The relations between tax lord and tenant seem then to have been very cordial and there were many vexed questions as for instance the size of the grain measure, the quality of the grain, the discount to be taken off the nominal amount payable - such matters were certainly causing
753
payment by the perpetual lessee who may deduct the whole amount paid
from what he owes to his tax lord. The tax lords resents this rule
very strongly, and I have received repeated representations from them
on the subject. The eldest of the Tangs of K'an Tin have drawn up at
my request a statement(marked A.) which I attach.
very fairly from the tax lord's point of view; they claim to be the
owners of the Land and to be treated as such by the Government.
It fucks
Muho the case
8. There would seen however to be very serious objections to
putting in the tax lord as owner of the land.
First of all he does not know the land and he will begin by
asking the Government to find it for him.
Secondly he is not the full owner and never really had full
have ownership. He would not at any time bed succeeded in turning out the
cultivator and of recent years it seems probably that his hold on the
cultivator has been gradually weakening.
Thirdly if we turn out the cultivator we have to face the question
who we are to put in his place.
The rent charge owner who receives something substantial? or
the tax payer who has only the most nominal interest in the land.
(see paragraph 7 at :A) °7
heder
The relations between tax lord and tenant seen then to have been
very cordial and there were many vexed questions as for instance the
size of the grain measure, the quality of the grain, the discount to
be taken off the nominal amount payable- such matters were certainly
causing
}
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.