barley. Summer crops were free of rent-an immunity possible only while cotton cultivation remains in its infancy. It is beyond the scope of this note to examine the suitability of this assessment but, in view especially of the exemption of the summer crop, it can quite confidently be asserted that it is not excessive. Yet the experiment cannot be said to have succeeded, even from the cultivator's point of view. The causes of failure may be divided into classes; they were partly inherent in the actual system, and partly unforeseen and accidental. In the winter of 1922, after the leases came into force, it became necessary to close the canal for silt clearance for an unusually long period. In the following year the season was adverse. The former of these misfortunes was certainly not allowed for in the terms of the lease, while the second which would not ordinarily justify special treatment, acquired an unexpected force from the circumstance that, in the absence of an adequate survey of holdings, the cultivators could plead an almost complete failure in one part which was in fact (but covertly) set off by their unauthorised cultivation in another part in excess of the allotted area. Here we meet the inherent defects in the system, viz., lack of a suitable survey and inadequately controlled watersupply.

In spite of the fact that the lease conditions prescribe a regular rotation of crops, experience shows that in practice the whole allotted area is, in the majority of cases, brought under cultivation in a single year; while the water distribution, being designed in accordance with the prescribed rotation, is of course inadequate for the excess cultivation. The result is that the whole basis of the fixed assessment is undermined and rendered unreliable. An attempt is now being made to obtain both an accurate survey of all holdings and a proper control of the water-supply.

The case of the Yusufiyah fixed assessment illustrates the urgent necessity for collecting the data referred to above. All this involves a co-ordination of the work of the departments dealing with revenue administration, with irrigation, with agriculture, and with surveys, which has not yet been attained.

It is, indeed, in the improvement of administration rather than in the tightening up of taxation that there lies the chief hope of increasing the revenue from the land. When a real improvement has been effected, it may be assumed that the system of farming. taxes (which is difficult to defend in principle and is justified only by its practical advantages in present circumstances) will automatically disappear. But whether the collection of taxes is made through the agency of tax-farmers or by the direct machinery of Government, it is beyond doubt that the present abuses, involving hardship to taxpayers and loss to Government, will not disappear until the revenue administration system has been radically altered. It suffers, at present, from the fact that the conduct of revenue work in the Liwa is in the hands of Mutasarrifs and Qaimmaqams, who are much engaged in political affairs,

and also, in the present fluid state of politics, are apt to be selected on grounds other than those of their revenue experience or capacity. These officials are primarily under the control of the Ministry of the Interior, and the Ministry of Finance has no direct local representative of status higher than that of a Muhasib or chief accountant. It was owing to the desirability of maintaining units of responsibility in the districts that the Finance Ministry, shortly after its assumption of control of land revenue in 1921, accepted an arrangement under which its own officials were placed in almost complete subordination to the Mutasarrif. Events have proved that this was a mistake, and much consideration is being given to the question of creating a class of revenue officials of higher status with primary responsibility for revenue administration in the Liwas, supported by the local executive authorities. But before this scheme can bear fruit it is necessary to provide for the systematic training of officials. In the meantime an undesirably large amount of centralized control by the Ministry is necessary, assisted by the British Inspectors in the Liwas. It is no reflection on the ability and zeal of the latter to say that their usefulness in revenue matters would be the greater if they too were less involved in the ebb and flow of local politics, and were free to apply themselves more systematically to the task of giving effect to the revenue policy of the Government. Nevertheless, their presence and influence, especially when it is felt that they have the support of the British forces behind them, cannot fail to exercise a good effect both on tax collection and on the taxpayers.

During the year 1923 the Government passed a law known as the Property Tax Law, which provided for a tax of 10 per cent. on the rental value of properties situated within municipal areas. This tax was in effect the old Turkish Vergo, which was, however, in force in Mosul only out of the three Wilayats of 'Iraq. During the occupation it had not been enforced, but, on the other hand, municipalities had been permitted to impose a similar tax and most of them had availed themselves of this source of revenue. The resumption of this tax by the State necessitated certain financial adjustments with the municipalities. First, the municipal contributions to the Treasury were abolished. These contributions had been justified on the ground that the State provided certain services which were properly a municipal charge either wholly or in part. The contribution was fixed at 12 per cent. of the sum total of (a) revenues of the municipality derived from taxes, and (b) the net revenues on municipal undertakings. Secondly, it was found necessary to make grants-in-aid to both Baghdad and Basra. The result was that though the tax produced 10.70 lakhs during the year 1923, the State lost the municipal contributions amounting to approximately 5 lakhs and gave grants-in-aid aggregating 4.50 lakhs, while the cost of administration was approximately Rs.76,000. The net gain, therefore, to the State was only Rs.44,000, approximately. In

the current year (1924), however, the tax has been estimated to produce 17 lakhs (and there is every indication that this sum will be realised); the grants-in-aid are Rs.4.10 lakhs and the cost of administration is Rs. 91,000.

The administration of this tax has not been free from difficulties. The assessment is carried out by committees composed partly of officials and partly of non-official members. Though the former are equal in number to the latter, and though their president (an official) has the casting vote, there is no doubt that they are often unduly influenced by the non-official members, who are generally selected from among those most interested in the low assessment of the tax. There is further a general tendency on the part of the wealthy and influential to evade payment, a practice which does not appear to be condemned by public opinion.

IV. MINISTRY OF JUSTICE.

1. The Civil Courts.

Throughout the country there are established Civil Courts of First Instance, which have jurisdiction to decide all such civil cases as are not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Religious Courts.

When the Civil Courts of First Instance were established in 1918 they were each composed of three judges, following the Turkish judicial system, and were set up at Baghdad, Basra, Hilla, Mosul and Ba'quba only. Later on it became apparent that it would be financially impossible to extend the system to all Liwas on account of the large number of judges required. The Single Judge Court, an experiment which had been tried with success by the Turks, was therefore called into being, and Courts of First Instance, composed of a single judge invested with the full powers of a Court of First Instance, were set up at ‘Amara, Nasiriya and other places.

Appendix I to this section sets out the list of Civil Courts. established at the end of 1924, there being the five Bench Courts above mentioned and nine Single Judge Courts, as well as those courts in the Mosul area which are visited by a touring single judge. The single-judge system has been further extended, owing to the heavy amount of business in the courts of the larger towns, and most of the judges of the Courts of First Instance are invested with single-judge powers, limited to the decision of suits of a value of 3,000 rupees, so that the full benches are relieved of the smaller

cases.

Appeal lies from Courts of First Instance, whether composed of benches or of single judges of full or limited powers, direct to the Court of Cassation in Baghdad, and there is no further appeal That court does not act entirely as a Court of Cassation, but, in those cases in which appeal lay to the Courts of Appeal under the Turkish Code of Civil Procedure, it deals with the matter in the manner prescribed for appeals, while in other matters it acts by the shorter procedure of revision only.

Small causes, i.e., suits of value not exceeding 750 rupees, and not involving the title to land, are decided by the Peace Courts, which are established at the places mentioned in Appendix I. * Wherever, in that appendix, a Court of First Instance, but no Peace Court, is mentioned, the single judge or one of the judges of the bench sits as a Peace Court to decide the smaller cases by the simple procedure of the Peace Court. At some other places, where there are a few Peace Court cases, but not enough to justify the appointment of a civil judge, the Qadhi of the Religious Court is empowered to hear suits as peace judge, generally with jurisdiction limited to suits of the value of 300 rupees.

From the decisions of the Peace Courts there is no appeal, but there is a direct recourse to the Court of Cassation for revision. The court, in addition to the powers possessed by the Turkish Court of Cassation of setting aside the judgment and ordering a new trial, may, if it has the necessary facts before it, give a final judgment in the case.

Four years ago it was hoped that it would be possible to provide for a second appeal in civil matters of importance, and to establish both a Court of Appeal and a Court of Cassation in Baghdad. To that end provision was made by law for the establishment of a Court of Cassation when convenient, the existing Court of Appeal to act, in the meantime, as a Court of Cassation as well as a Court of Appeal. It has not yet been found possible to establish the court, neither money nor suitable judges being available. The new courts' law, which will be placed before Parliament at the first opportunity, makes no provision for both courts, but for a Court of Cassation only, and the present court, which is, in fact, the old Court of Appeal, will continue to act in both capacities. The court is now overburdened, and additional judges will require to be appointed if the business is to be disposed of with thoroughness and without unreasonable delay.

The law administered in the Civil Courts consists of:

(a) The body of Ottoman legislation in force at the date of the Occupation, so far as the same has not been altered. by local legislation since that date.

(b) The proclamations, rules and laws of the military and other Governments which have exercised authority in 'Iraq since the Occupation.

*See page 153.

The Turkish Civil Code, or "Majalla," is the foundation of Ottoman legal principles. It was published in 1869, and is a compilation of Mohammedan law as accepted by the Hanafite Sect. Archaic and useless in many ways, it requires much revision to adapt it to the requirements of the present day, but it is held in much respect by the inhabitants of 'Iraq and revision must be undertaken with the greatest care. A commission is now sitting in Turkey for the purpose of revising the Majalla, and the result of their efforts is awaited with interest.

Commercial transactions are governed by the Code of Commerce, so far as concerns bills of exchange, partnerships, bankruptcies and commission agents. It is a translation, with some omissions, of the corresponding sections of the French Code

2. The Criminal Courts.

There are four classes of Criminal Courts :

(1) Courts of Session, which may inflict any punishment authorised by law.

(2) Courts of Magistrates of the first class, which may award a sentence not exceeding two years' imprisonment, or three months summarily.

(3) Courts of Magistrates of the second class, which may award a sentence not exceeding six months' imprisonment, or six weeks summarily.

(4) Courts of Magistrates of the third class, which may award summarily a sentence not exceeding one month's imprisonment.

All civil judges are magistrates of the second class, while a large number of them, including all British judges, have first-class powers.

A Court of Session is invariably composed of three magistrates. In places where the Court of First Instance consists of a bench of judges, those judges can form the court, but in other places it is necessary for judges to be sent out specially to form the courts.

All findings and sentences of Sessions Courts are submitted to the Court of Cassation and do not take effect unless confirmed by that court, which has also power to vary sentences. It is for consideration whether submission for confirmation as a matter of course should not be restricted to heavy sentences, in order to reduce the work in the Court of Cassation, leaving the appeal to that court in other cases to be a matter of right. The findings and sentences of magistrates do not require confirmation, but, if the sentence exceeds that which a magistrate can impose summarily, appeal lies to the Court of Sessions.