— BAH The
parallel of mai-k.
the
common
187
In this instance, again, we have the corresponding in England wherewith to compare it.
common mark
Sir H. Maine, page 92, quotes Marshall's description of ancient commonable lands " On the outskirts of the arable lands, where the soil is adapted to the pasturage of cattle, one or more stinted pastures or hams were laid
—
out for milking cows, working cattle, or other stock which required superior pasturage in summer." Let us suppose, when one of these English communities passed under the yoke of the lord, and the township became the manor, that the freemen of the community, besides retaining their portion of the arable mark (their sir), succeeded in retaining these stinted pastures (raJchauna), and we have the parallel exact. The lord, we may be quite sure, would resist any attempt on the part of the freemen to bring these pastures under tillage without bis express permission, which, if given, would probably be accompanied by stipulations as to rent, &c., more stringent than those already in force regarding their free tenemental acres.
not impossible that in this we may have the key to the difficulty Sir H. Maine in the fact that, intermixed with the tenemental or freehold lands, are found many large tracts which are copyhold of the manor, while some also are held by the intermediate tenure known as customary freehold. May not these intruding tracts held on these base tenures have originally been the rakhauna of the freemen, subsequently brought under cultivation under special provisos ? It
is
met with by
Those cases in 1st. Grove tenures may be divided into two classes which the grove was planted by the under-proprietor, GroTes two classes of tenures. while he was in proprietary possession of the village, and of which he has retained possession.
—
2nd. Cases in which the grove has been planted by a cultivator or under-proprietor subsequent to the incorporation of the village in the ilaqa. All other cases are exceptional, and depending, as they do, on special circumstances, need not be noted here.
In the
first class -.
power to cut down
noted above, the grove, together with the land on which it is planted, constitutes an integral part of the underproprietary holding of the ex-zamindar. He had full the trees, to replant, or to make what use he liked of
the ground.
The taluqdar did not interfere with his full right to sell and mortgage the grove, and never dreamed of exacting rent from him. If the trees fell, and the ground thus became available for cultivation, it would still remain the property of the under-proprietor, and would probably be considered an adjunct of and subject to the same rules as to rent, &c., as his other lands in the village. If the under-proprietor held rent-free lands in the if they were subject to village, the vacated plot would be held rent-free also a low rent, a similar rent would probably be demanded from this plot also.
the customs regulating the tenure differed but in all parts of the different estates ^^^ district the following customs held good, provided that the grove was planted with the permission of the landlord.
In the second _
class of cases,
somewhat in
