Question Description
The passage given below is followed by a set of questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.It is a question of very great importance, no less morally and politically than fiscally, which of these systems deserves most encouragement- that in which the Government considers the immediate cultivators to be the hereditary proprietors, and, through its own public officers, parcels out the lands among them, and adjusts the rates of rent demandable from every minute partition, as the lands become more and more subdivided by the Hindu and Muslim law of inheritance; or that in which the Government considers him who holds the area of a whole village or estate collectively as the hereditary proprietor, and the immediate cultivators as his lease- tenants- leaving the rates of rent to be adjusted among the parties without the aid of public officers, or interposing only to enforce the fulfillment of their mutual contracts. In the latter of these two systems the land will supply more and better members to the middle and higher classes of the society, and create and preserve a better feeling between them and the peasantry, or immediate cultivators of the soil; and it will occasion the re-investment upon the soil, in works of ornament and utility, of a greater portion of the annual returns of rent and profit, and a less expenditure in the costs of litigation in our civil courts, and bribery to our public officers.Those who advocate the other system, which makes the immediate cultivators the proprietors, will, for the most part, be found to reason upon false premises - upon the assumption that the rates of rent demandable from the immediate cultivators of the soil were everywhere limited and established by immemorial usage, in a certain sum of money per acre, or a certain share of the crop produced from it; and that these rates were not only so limited and fixed, but everywhere well known to the people, and might, consequently, have become well known to the Government, and recorded in public registers. Now every practical man in India, who has had opportunities of becoming well acquainted with the matter,knows that the reverse is the case; that the rate of rent demandable from these cultivators never was the same upon any two estates at the same time: nor even the same upon any one estate at different limes, or for any consecutive number of years. The rates vary every year on every estate, according to the varying circumstances that influence them - such as greater or less exhaustion of the soil, greater or less facilities of irrigation, manure, transit to market, drainage- or from fortuitous advantages on one hand, or calamities of season on the other; or many other circumstances which affect the value of the land, and the abilities of the cultivators to pay. It is not so much the proprietors of the estate or the Government as the cultivators themselves who demand every year a readjustment of the rate demandable upon their different holdings. This readjustment must take place; and, if there is no landlord to effect it, Government must effect it through its own officers. Every holding becomes subdivided when the cultivating proprietor dies and leaves more than one child; and, as the whole face of the country is open and without hedges, the division is easily and speedily made. Thus the field-map which represents an estate one year will never represent it fairly five years after; in fact, we might almost as well attempt to map the waves of the ocean as field-map the face of any considerable area in any part of India. If there be any truth in my conclusions, our Government has acted unwisely in going, as it has generally done, into [one or other of] the two extremes, in its settlement of the land revenue.Q.What is the writers view regarding settlement of land revenue?a)The writer wishes for a better way to settle land revenue that is morally, politically and fiscally correct.b)The writer believes that readjustment of the rate of land revenue is variable and this will help the government control the system through its own officers.c)It is beneficial for the government to readjust the settlement of land revenue every year to maximise profits.d)It will help curb practices of bribery to public officers.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2024 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about The passage given below is followed by a set of questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.It is a question of very great importance, no less morally and politically than fiscally, which of these systems deserves most encouragement- that in which the Government considers the immediate cultivators to be the hereditary proprietors, and, through its own public officers, parcels out the lands among them, and adjusts the rates of rent demandable from every minute partition, as the lands become more and more subdivided by the Hindu and Muslim law of inheritance; or that in which the Government considers him who holds the area of a whole village or estate collectively as the hereditary proprietor, and the immediate cultivators as his lease- tenants- leaving the rates of rent to be adjusted among the parties without the aid of public officers, or interposing only to enforce the fulfillment of their mutual contracts. In the latter of these two systems the land will supply more and better members to the middle and higher classes of the society, and create and preserve a better feeling between them and the peasantry, or immediate cultivators of the soil; and it will occasion the re-investment upon the soil, in works of ornament and utility, of a greater portion of the annual returns of rent and profit, and a less expenditure in the costs of litigation in our civil courts, and bribery to our public officers.Those who advocate the other system, which makes the immediate cultivators the proprietors, will, for the most part, be found to reason upon false premises - upon the assumption that the rates of rent demandable from the immediate cultivators of the soil were everywhere limited and established by immemorial usage, in a certain sum of money per acre, or a certain share of the crop produced from it; and that these rates were not only so limited and fixed, but everywhere well known to the people, and might, consequently, have become well known to the Government, and recorded in public registers. Now every practical man in India, who has had opportunities of becoming well acquainted with the matter,knows that the reverse is the case; that the rate of rent demandable from these cultivators never was the same upon any two estates at the same time: nor even the same upon any one estate at different limes, or for any consecutive number of years. The rates vary every year on every estate, according to the varying circumstances that influence them - such as greater or less exhaustion of the soil, greater or less facilities of irrigation, manure, transit to market, drainage- or from fortuitous advantages on one hand, or calamities of season on the other; or many other circumstances which affect the value of the land, and the abilities of the cultivators to pay. It is not so much the proprietors of the estate or the Government as the cultivators themselves who demand every year a readjustment of the rate demandable upon their different holdings. This readjustment must take place; and, if there is no landlord to effect it, Government must effect it through its own officers. Every holding becomes subdivided when the cultivating proprietor dies and leaves more than one child; and, as the whole face of the country is open and without hedges, the division is easily and speedily made. Thus the field-map which represents an estate one year will never represent it fairly five years after; in fact, we might almost as well attempt to map the waves of the ocean as field-map the face of any considerable area in any part of India. If there be any truth in my conclusions, our Government has acted unwisely in going, as it has generally done, into [one or other of] the two extremes, in its settlement of the land revenue.Q.What is the writers view regarding settlement of land revenue?a)The writer wishes for a better way to settle land revenue that is morally, politically and fiscally correct.b)The writer believes that readjustment of the rate of land revenue is variable and this will help the government control the system through its own officers.c)It is beneficial for the government to readjust the settlement of land revenue every year to maximise profits.d)It will help curb practices of bribery to public officers.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for The passage given below is followed by a set of questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.It is a question of very great importance, no less morally and politically than fiscally, which of these systems deserves most encouragement- that in which the Government considers the immediate cultivators to be the hereditary proprietors, and, through its own public officers, parcels out the lands among them, and adjusts the rates of rent demandable from every minute partition, as the lands become more and more subdivided by the Hindu and Muslim law of inheritance; or that in which the Government considers him who holds the area of a whole village or estate collectively as the hereditary proprietor, and the immediate cultivators as his lease- tenants- leaving the rates of rent to be adjusted among the parties without the aid of public officers, or interposing only to enforce the fulfillment of their mutual contracts. In the latter of these two systems the land will supply more and better members to the middle and higher classes of the society, and create and preserve a better feeling between them and the peasantry, or immediate cultivators of the soil; and it will occasion the re-investment upon the soil, in works of ornament and utility, of a greater portion of the annual returns of rent and profit, and a less expenditure in the costs of litigation in our civil courts, and bribery to our public officers.Those who advocate the other system, which makes the immediate cultivators the proprietors, will, for the most part, be found to reason upon false premises - upon the assumption that the rates of rent demandable from the immediate cultivators of the soil were everywhere limited and established by immemorial usage, in a certain sum of money per acre, or a certain share of the crop produced from it; and that these rates were not only so limited and fixed, but everywhere well known to the people, and might, consequently, have become well known to the Government, and recorded in public registers. Now every practical man in India, who has had opportunities of becoming well acquainted with the matter,knows that the reverse is the case; that the rate of rent demandable from these cultivators never was the same upon any two estates at the same time: nor even the same upon any one estate at different limes, or for any consecutive number of years. The rates vary every year on every estate, according to the varying circumstances that influence them - such as greater or less exhaustion of the soil, greater or less facilities of irrigation, manure, transit to market, drainage- or from fortuitous advantages on one hand, or calamities of season on the other; or many other circumstances which affect the value of the land, and the abilities of the cultivators to pay. It is not so much the proprietors of the estate or the Government as the cultivators themselves who demand every year a readjustment of the rate demandable upon their different holdings. This readjustment must take place; and, if there is no landlord to effect it, Government must effect it through its own officers. Every holding becomes subdivided when the cultivating proprietor dies and leaves more than one child; and, as the whole face of the country is open and without hedges, the division is easily and speedily made. Thus the field-map which represents an estate one year will never represent it fairly five years after; in fact, we might almost as well attempt to map the waves of the ocean as field-map the face of any considerable area in any part of India. If there be any truth in my conclusions, our Government has acted unwisely in going, as it has generally done, into [one or other of] the two extremes, in its settlement of the land revenue.Q.What is the writers view regarding settlement of land revenue?a)The writer wishes for a better way to settle land revenue that is morally, politically and fiscally correct.b)The writer believes that readjustment of the rate of land revenue is variable and this will help the government control the system through its own officers.c)It is beneficial for the government to readjust the settlement of land revenue every year to maximise profits.d)It will help curb practices of bribery to public officers.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for The passage given below is followed by a set of questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.It is a question of very great importance, no less morally and politically than fiscally, which of these systems deserves most encouragement- that in which the Government considers the immediate cultivators to be the hereditary proprietors, and, through its own public officers, parcels out the lands among them, and adjusts the rates of rent demandable from every minute partition, as the lands become more and more subdivided by the Hindu and Muslim law of inheritance; or that in which the Government considers him who holds the area of a whole village or estate collectively as the hereditary proprietor, and the immediate cultivators as his lease- tenants- leaving the rates of rent to be adjusted among the parties without the aid of public officers, or interposing only to enforce the fulfillment of their mutual contracts. In the latter of these two systems the land will supply more and better members to the middle and higher classes of the society, and create and preserve a better feeling between them and the peasantry, or immediate cultivators of the soil; and it will occasion the re-investment upon the soil, in works of ornament and utility, of a greater portion of the annual returns of rent and profit, and a less expenditure in the costs of litigation in our civil courts, and bribery to our public officers.Those who advocate the other system, which makes the immediate cultivators the proprietors, will, for the most part, be found to reason upon false premises - upon the assumption that the rates of rent demandable from the immediate cultivators of the soil were everywhere limited and established by immemorial usage, in a certain sum of money per acre, or a certain share of the crop produced from it; and that these rates were not only so limited and fixed, but everywhere well known to the people, and might, consequently, have become well known to the Government, and recorded in public registers. Now every practical man in India, who has had opportunities of becoming well acquainted with the matter,knows that the reverse is the case; that the rate of rent demandable from these cultivators never was the same upon any two estates at the same time: nor even the same upon any one estate at different limes, or for any consecutive number of years. The rates vary every year on every estate, according to the varying circumstances that influence them - such as greater or less exhaustion of the soil, greater or less facilities of irrigation, manure, transit to market, drainage- or from fortuitous advantages on one hand, or calamities of season on the other; or many other circumstances which affect the value of the land, and the abilities of the cultivators to pay. It is not so much the proprietors of the estate or the Government as the cultivators themselves who demand every year a readjustment of the rate demandable upon their different holdings. This readjustment must take place; and, if there is no landlord to effect it, Government must effect it through its own officers. Every holding becomes subdivided when the cultivating proprietor dies and leaves more than one child; and, as the whole face of the country is open and without hedges, the division is easily and speedily made. Thus the field-map which represents an estate one year will never represent it fairly five years after; in fact, we might almost as well attempt to map the waves of the ocean as field-map the face of any considerable area in any part of India. If there be any truth in my conclusions, our Government has acted unwisely in going, as it has generally done, into [one or other of] the two extremes, in its settlement of the land revenue.Q.What is the writers view regarding settlement of land revenue?a)The writer wishes for a better way to settle land revenue that is morally, politically and fiscally correct.b)The writer believes that readjustment of the rate of land revenue is variable and this will help the government control the system through its own officers.c)It is beneficial for the government to readjust the settlement of land revenue every year to maximise profits.d)It will help curb practices of bribery to public officers.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of The passage given below is followed by a set of questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.It is a question of very great importance, no less morally and politically than fiscally, which of these systems deserves most encouragement- that in which the Government considers the immediate cultivators to be the hereditary proprietors, and, through its own public officers, parcels out the lands among them, and adjusts the rates of rent demandable from every minute partition, as the lands become more and more subdivided by the Hindu and Muslim law of inheritance; or that in which the Government considers him who holds the area of a whole village or estate collectively as the hereditary proprietor, and the immediate cultivators as his lease- tenants- leaving the rates of rent to be adjusted among the parties without the aid of public officers, or interposing only to enforce the fulfillment of their mutual contracts. In the latter of these two systems the land will supply more and better members to the middle and higher classes of the society, and create and preserve a better feeling between them and the peasantry, or immediate cultivators of the soil; and it will occasion the re-investment upon the soil, in works of ornament and utility, of a greater portion of the annual returns of rent and profit, and a less expenditure in the costs of litigation in our civil courts, and bribery to our public officers.Those who advocate the other system, which makes the immediate cultivators the proprietors, will, for the most part, be found to reason upon false premises - upon the assumption that the rates of rent demandable from the immediate cultivators of the soil were everywhere limited and established by immemorial usage, in a certain sum of money per acre, or a certain share of the crop produced from it; and that these rates were not only so limited and fixed, but everywhere well known to the people, and might, consequently, have become well known to the Government, and recorded in public registers. Now every practical man in India, who has had opportunities of becoming well acquainted with the matter,knows that the reverse is the case; that the rate of rent demandable from these cultivators never was the same upon any two estates at the same time: nor even the same upon any one estate at different limes, or for any consecutive number of years. The rates vary every year on every estate, according to the varying circumstances that influence them - such as greater or less exhaustion of the soil, greater or less facilities of irrigation, manure, transit to market, drainage- or from fortuitous advantages on one hand, or calamities of season on the other; or many other circumstances which affect the value of the land, and the abilities of the cultivators to pay. It is not so much the proprietors of the estate or the Government as the cultivators themselves who demand every year a readjustment of the rate demandable upon their different holdings. This readjustment must take place; and, if there is no landlord to effect it, Government must effect it through its own officers. Every holding becomes subdivided when the cultivating proprietor dies and leaves more than one child; and, as the whole face of the country is open and without hedges, the division is easily and speedily made. Thus the field-map which represents an estate one year will never represent it fairly five years after; in fact, we might almost as well attempt to map the waves of the ocean as field-map the face of any considerable area in any part of India. If there be any truth in my conclusions, our Government has acted unwisely in going, as it has generally done, into [one or other of] the two extremes, in its settlement of the land revenue.Q.What is the writers view regarding settlement of land revenue?a)The writer wishes for a better way to settle land revenue that is morally, politically and fiscally correct.b)The writer believes that readjustment of the rate of land revenue is variable and this will help the government control the system through its own officers.c)It is beneficial for the government to readjust the settlement of land revenue every year to maximise profits.d)It will help curb practices of bribery to public officers.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of The passage given below is followed by a set of questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.It is a question of very great importance, no less morally and politically than fiscally, which of these systems deserves most encouragement- that in which the Government considers the immediate cultivators to be the hereditary proprietors, and, through its own public officers, parcels out the lands among them, and adjusts the rates of rent demandable from every minute partition, as the lands become more and more subdivided by the Hindu and Muslim law of inheritance; or that in which the Government considers him who holds the area of a whole village or estate collectively as the hereditary proprietor, and the immediate cultivators as his lease- tenants- leaving the rates of rent to be adjusted among the parties without the aid of public officers, or interposing only to enforce the fulfillment of their mutual contracts. In the latter of these two systems the land will supply more and better members to the middle and higher classes of the society, and create and preserve a better feeling between them and the peasantry, or immediate cultivators of the soil; and it will occasion the re-investment upon the soil, in works of ornament and utility, of a greater portion of the annual returns of rent and profit, and a less expenditure in the costs of litigation in our civil courts, and bribery to our public officers.Those who advocate the other system, which makes the immediate cultivators the proprietors, will, for the most part, be found to reason upon false premises - upon the assumption that the rates of rent demandable from the immediate cultivators of the soil were everywhere limited and established by immemorial usage, in a certain sum of money per acre, or a certain share of the crop produced from it; and that these rates were not only so limited and fixed, but everywhere well known to the people, and might, consequently, have become well known to the Government, and recorded in public registers. Now every practical man in India, who has had opportunities of becoming well acquainted with the matter,knows that the reverse is the case; that the rate of rent demandable from these cultivators never was the same upon any two estates at the same time: nor even the same upon any one estate at different limes, or for any consecutive number of years. The rates vary every year on every estate, according to the varying circumstances that influence them - such as greater or less exhaustion of the soil, greater or less facilities of irrigation, manure, transit to market, drainage- or from fortuitous advantages on one hand, or calamities of season on the other; or many other circumstances which affect the value of the land, and the abilities of the cultivators to pay. It is not so much the proprietors of the estate or the Government as the cultivators themselves who demand every year a readjustment of the rate demandable upon their different holdings. This readjustment must take place; and, if there is no landlord to effect it, Government must effect it through its own officers. Every holding becomes subdivided when the cultivating proprietor dies and leaves more than one child; and, as the whole face of the country is open and without hedges, the division is easily and speedily made. Thus the field-map which represents an estate one year will never represent it fairly five years after; in fact, we might almost as well attempt to map the waves of the ocean as field-map the face of any considerable area in any part of India. If there be any truth in my conclusions, our Government has acted unwisely in going, as it has generally done, into [one or other of] the two extremes, in its settlement of the land revenue.Q.What is the writers view regarding settlement of land revenue?a)The writer wishes for a better way to settle land revenue that is morally, politically and fiscally correct.b)The writer believes that readjustment of the rate of land revenue is variable and this will help the government control the system through its own officers.c)It is beneficial for the government to readjust the settlement of land revenue every year to maximise profits.d)It will help curb practices of bribery to public officers.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for The passage given below is followed by a set of questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.It is a question of very great importance, no less morally and politically than fiscally, which of these systems deserves most encouragement- that in which the Government considers the immediate cultivators to be the hereditary proprietors, and, through its own public officers, parcels out the lands among them, and adjusts the rates of rent demandable from every minute partition, as the lands become more and more subdivided by the Hindu and Muslim law of inheritance; or that in which the Government considers him who holds the area of a whole village or estate collectively as the hereditary proprietor, and the immediate cultivators as his lease- tenants- leaving the rates of rent to be adjusted among the parties without the aid of public officers, or interposing only to enforce the fulfillment of their mutual contracts. In the latter of these two systems the land will supply more and better members to the middle and higher classes of the society, and create and preserve a better feeling between them and the peasantry, or immediate cultivators of the soil; and it will occasion the re-investment upon the soil, in works of ornament and utility, of a greater portion of the annual returns of rent and profit, and a less expenditure in the costs of litigation in our civil courts, and bribery to our public officers.Those who advocate the other system, which makes the immediate cultivators the proprietors, will, for the most part, be found to reason upon false premises - upon the assumption that the rates of rent demandable from the immediate cultivators of the soil were everywhere limited and established by immemorial usage, in a certain sum of money per acre, or a certain share of the crop produced from it; and that these rates were not only so limited and fixed, but everywhere well known to the people, and might, consequently, have become well known to the Government, and recorded in public registers. Now every practical man in India, who has had opportunities of becoming well acquainted with the matter,knows that the reverse is the case; that the rate of rent demandable from these cultivators never was the same upon any two estates at the same time: nor even the same upon any one estate at different limes, or for any consecutive number of years. The rates vary every year on every estate, according to the varying circumstances that influence them - such as greater or less exhaustion of the soil, greater or less facilities of irrigation, manure, transit to market, drainage- or from fortuitous advantages on one hand, or calamities of season on the other; or many other circumstances which affect the value of the land, and the abilities of the cultivators to pay. It is not so much the proprietors of the estate or the Government as the cultivators themselves who demand every year a readjustment of the rate demandable upon their different holdings. This readjustment must take place; and, if there is no landlord to effect it, Government must effect it through its own officers. Every holding becomes subdivided when the cultivating proprietor dies and leaves more than one child; and, as the whole face of the country is open and without hedges, the division is easily and speedily made. Thus the field-map which represents an estate one year will never represent it fairly five years after; in fact, we might almost as well attempt to map the waves of the ocean as field-map the face of any considerable area in any part of India. If there be any truth in my conclusions, our Government has acted unwisely in going, as it has generally done, into [one or other of] the two extremes, in its settlement of the land revenue.Q.What is the writers view regarding settlement of land revenue?a)The writer wishes for a better way to settle land revenue that is morally, politically and fiscally correct.b)The writer believes that readjustment of the rate of land revenue is variable and this will help the government control the system through its own officers.c)It is beneficial for the government to readjust the settlement of land revenue every year to maximise profits.d)It will help curb practices of bribery to public officers.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of The passage given below is followed by a set of questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.It is a question of very great importance, no less morally and politically than fiscally, which of these systems deserves most encouragement- that in which the Government considers the immediate cultivators to be the hereditary proprietors, and, through its own public officers, parcels out the lands among them, and adjusts the rates of rent demandable from every minute partition, as the lands become more and more subdivided by the Hindu and Muslim law of inheritance; or that in which the Government considers him who holds the area of a whole village or estate collectively as the hereditary proprietor, and the immediate cultivators as his lease- tenants- leaving the rates of rent to be adjusted among the parties without the aid of public officers, or interposing only to enforce the fulfillment of their mutual contracts. In the latter of these two systems the land will supply more and better members to the middle and higher classes of the society, and create and preserve a better feeling between them and the peasantry, or immediate cultivators of the soil; and it will occasion the re-investment upon the soil, in works of ornament and utility, of a greater portion of the annual returns of rent and profit, and a less expenditure in the costs of litigation in our civil courts, and bribery to our public officers.Those who advocate the other system, which makes the immediate cultivators the proprietors, will, for the most part, be found to reason upon false premises - upon the assumption that the rates of rent demandable from the immediate cultivators of the soil were everywhere limited and established by immemorial usage, in a certain sum of money per acre, or a certain share of the crop produced from it; and that these rates were not only so limited and fixed, but everywhere well known to the people, and might, consequently, have become well known to the Government, and recorded in public registers. Now every practical man in India, who has had opportunities of becoming well acquainted with the matter,knows that the reverse is the case; that the rate of rent demandable from these cultivators never was the same upon any two estates at the same time: nor even the same upon any one estate at different limes, or for any consecutive number of years. The rates vary every year on every estate, according to the varying circumstances that influence them - such as greater or less exhaustion of the soil, greater or less facilities of irrigation, manure, transit to market, drainage- or from fortuitous advantages on one hand, or calamities of season on the other; or many other circumstances which affect the value of the land, and the abilities of the cultivators to pay. It is not so much the proprietors of the estate or the Government as the cultivators themselves who demand every year a readjustment of the rate demandable upon their different holdings. This readjustment must take place; and, if there is no landlord to effect it, Government must effect it through its own officers. Every holding becomes subdivided when the cultivating proprietor dies and leaves more than one child; and, as the whole face of the country is open and without hedges, the division is easily and speedily made. Thus the field-map which represents an estate one year will never represent it fairly five years after; in fact, we might almost as well attempt to map the waves of the ocean as field-map the face of any considerable area in any part of India. If there be any truth in my conclusions, our Government has acted unwisely in going, as it has generally done, into [one or other of] the two extremes, in its settlement of the land revenue.Q.What is the writers view regarding settlement of land revenue?a)The writer wishes for a better way to settle land revenue that is morally, politically and fiscally correct.b)The writer believes that readjustment of the rate of land revenue is variable and this will help the government control the system through its own officers.c)It is beneficial for the government to readjust the settlement of land revenue every year to maximise profits.d)It will help curb practices of bribery to public officers.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice The passage given below is followed by a set of questions. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.It is a question of very great importance, no less morally and politically than fiscally, which of these systems deserves most encouragement- that in which the Government considers the immediate cultivators to be the hereditary proprietors, and, through its own public officers, parcels out the lands among them, and adjusts the rates of rent demandable from every minute partition, as the lands become more and more subdivided by the Hindu and Muslim law of inheritance; or that in which the Government considers him who holds the area of a whole village or estate collectively as the hereditary proprietor, and the immediate cultivators as his lease- tenants- leaving the rates of rent to be adjusted among the parties without the aid of public officers, or interposing only to enforce the fulfillment of their mutual contracts. In the latter of these two systems the land will supply more and better members to the middle and higher classes of the society, and create and preserve a better feeling between them and the peasantry, or immediate cultivators of the soil; and it will occasion the re-investment upon the soil, in works of ornament and utility, of a greater portion of the annual returns of rent and profit, and a less expenditure in the costs of litigation in our civil courts, and bribery to our public officers.Those who advocate the other system, which makes the immediate cultivators the proprietors, will, for the most part, be found to reason upon false premises - upon the assumption that the rates of rent demandable from the immediate cultivators of the soil were everywhere limited and established by immemorial usage, in a certain sum of money per acre, or a certain share of the crop produced from it; and that these rates were not only so limited and fixed, but everywhere well known to the people, and might, consequently, have become well known to the Government, and recorded in public registers. Now every practical man in India, who has had opportunities of becoming well acquainted with the matter,knows that the reverse is the case; that the rate of rent demandable from these cultivators never was the same upon any two estates at the same time: nor even the same upon any one estate at different limes, or for any consecutive number of years. The rates vary every year on every estate, according to the varying circumstances that influence them - such as greater or less exhaustion of the soil, greater or less facilities of irrigation, manure, transit to market, drainage- or from fortuitous advantages on one hand, or calamities of season on the other; or many other circumstances which affect the value of the land, and the abilities of the cultivators to pay. It is not so much the proprietors of the estate or the Government as the cultivators themselves who demand every year a readjustment of the rate demandable upon their different holdings. This readjustment must take place; and, if there is no landlord to effect it, Government must effect it through its own officers. Every holding becomes subdivided when the cultivating proprietor dies and leaves more than one child; and, as the whole face of the country is open and without hedges, the division is easily and speedily made. Thus the field-map which represents an estate one year will never represent it fairly five years after; in fact, we might almost as well attempt to map the waves of the ocean as field-map the face of any considerable area in any part of India. If there be any truth in my conclusions, our Government has acted unwisely in going, as it has generally done, into [one or other of] the two extremes, in its settlement of the land revenue.Q.What is the writers view regarding settlement of land revenue?a)The writer wishes for a better way to settle land revenue that is morally, politically and fiscally correct.b)The writer believes that readjustment of the rate of land revenue is variable and this will help the government control the system through its own officers.c)It is beneficial for the government to readjust the settlement of land revenue every year to maximise profits.d)It will help curb practices of bribery to public officers.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.