Page:Indian Journal of Economics Volume 2.djvu/548

E. V. $UNDARAM REDDY these holdings comprise fields scattered plies, open of sizes much below an s?re. therefore is to find out how exactly in different The problem this infinite process of sub-division could be' prevented and secondly how to bring together these scattered strips comprised in the holding so as to secure as far as possible con- solidated areas which will facilitate effective cultivation. The Board of Revenue in answer to the Govern- ment Memorandum sent to it with regard to the subject after consideration of the papers received along with that and the opinions of persons who were invited to consider the mat?er h?ve come to the following conclusions. Before stating them they examined the figures relating to holdings in Faslis 1810 and 1825 and found-that the figures referred to 'in their enclosure regarding the number and extent of. agricultural holdings in the Presidency for the years given lent considerable support to the view that of these holdings s great proportion were un- economic from a purely agricultural point of view. They were careful to indicate that there were a num- ber of factors which Ought to be taken into accoun? in considering the figures therein given. They said: "It is often the case, for instance, that a man holds one puttab and that a joint putradar has also a putt?h of which he is the sole owner; it is impossible ?o know how many persons the average puttah holding is intended to support; the figures take no account. of. under tenure holdings; and it is well known that most of, the smaller rots have subsidiary occupations unconnee?d or only remotely connected with .agri- culture". It was, however, admitted by them that ?ere was a tendency on the par? of smaller holdings to become even smaller, and the figures rela?ing to the holdings given by them indicate that. The first minute sub-division of. agricultural lands exists, and