(3) A copy of the rules under section 41 for the time being in force in a cantonment shall be kept open to ins pection free of charge at all reasonable times in the office of the cantonment Authority.

(4) In making any rule under section 41, sub-section (2), clause (b), the Governor General in Council may direct that whoever obstructs any person, not being a publio servant within the meaning of section 21 of the Indian Penal Code, XLV of 1860, in making any inspection or entry, shall be punishable with fine which may extend to fifty rupees and, in the case of a continuing offence, with fine which, in addition to such fine as aforesaid, may extend to five rupees for every day after the first during which such offence continues.

Inapplicability of section 556 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, the trials of offences against rules.

43. No Judge or Magistrate shall be deemed, within the meaning of section 556 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, V of 1898, to be a party to, or personally interested in, any prosecution for an offence against any rule under this Act merely because he is a member of the Cantonment Committee or has ordered or approved the prosecution.

44. No suit or other legal proceeding shall lie Protection to persons against any person for anything done, or in good faith intended to

acting under Act,

be done, under this Act or in pursuance of any lawful notice or order issued under this Act.

OWNERSHIP OF LANDS IN CANTONMENTS.

Section 3 clause (5) of the Cantonment House accomodation Bill, 1898 provided that all land situate in a cantonment shall be presumed to belong to the Government unless it be proved to belong to some private owner. This raised a large opposition and memorials were submitted from several quarters to the Government who considering that it was foreign to the object of the Bill to touch this question condescended to omit this clause and clauses 3 and 4 which were subsidiary to it and refrained from arming itself with any artificial legal presumption. Thus the Act left the qusetion of the ownership of the lands in cantonments where no grant was proved from the Government just where it was before. The Government side of the question was ably put forward by the Honorable Major general Sir Edmond Elles whose speech is glven hereafter.

It may be mentioned in this connection that the Bill used the term grantee for owners of houses in Cantonments, This term was dropped and the term "owner" is used now which is defined in S. 2 cl. (f) of the Act.-See the Speech of the Hon'ble Mr. Pugh.

tonment House accomoda

tion Bill.

S. 3 cl. (3) The Local Government shall cause public Provisions of the Can- notice of every such inquiry to be given in the Cantonment, such notice shall specify, if the Act is to be operative in a part of the Cantonment the partin which it is to be operative, and shall require all persons claiming to hold any land in the Canonment or part of the Cantonment, as the case may be, by a lawfull title acqured by him or by his predecessors in title prior to the formation of the Cantonment or the inclusion in it of that part in which the Act is to be operative, to

appear personally or by an agent, before an officer to be named in the notice at a time and place therein mentioned (such time not being earlier than 15 days after the date of publication of the notice) and to state the natures of their claims and their objections (if any) to the land being included in the area in which the Act is to be operative.

(4), On the day so fixed, or any other subsequent day to which the enquiry may be adjourned, the officer so named shall proceed to inquire into any claims and objection any person has stated pursuant to the notice given under sub-section (3) and shall make a report there on.

(5). Prima facie, all land in such a Cantonment as aforesaid shall be deemed to be held under a grant from Her Majesty, but if any person proves to the satisfaction of the Local Government that he holds any lands by a lawful title prior to the formation of the Cantonment then such land shall be excluded from the area of the notification and in like manner if pending the inquiry or at any time thereafter, any land is proved by the decree of a Court of Competent jurisdection to be held under such lawful title, it shall be excluded from the area of the notification by a further notification to be published in the same manner as the original notification.-Cantonment House Accomodation Bill, Gazette of India, 5th November 1898 Pt. VI.

CANTONMENTS (HOUSE-ACCOMMODATION

BILL.)

The Hon'ble Sir Edmond Elles made the following Statement as to the Cantonments (House-Accomodation) Bill:

"My Lord, I propose, with Your Excellency's permission, to make a statement regarding the coudrse which we intend to pursue in dealing with the Cantonments (HouseAccommodation) Bill.

"This Bill, the object of which is to grapple with the great and ever increasing difficulty experienced by officers in securing suitable accommodation in houses built within the limits of cantonments, was after the most prolonged consideration dating back to the year 1887, if not earlier, introduced in the Legislative Council by my predecessor Sir Edwin Collen on the 4th November 1898.

Now, I desire to make it very plain at the outset that the Government of India are unable to admit that cantonment areas can be regarded in the same light as the other parts of the country. On the countrary, the circumstances in them are altogether special and totally different from the circumstances anywhere else; and I have no hesitation in asserting that this fact is well known and thoroughly felt and appreciated by every resident of any of the permanent military stations, which here in India we cail 'cantonments.' The term has for over a century been applied in this country to well defined areas, always primarily, and in some instances almost exclusively, set apart for the occupation of troops and their foilowers. The necessity for maintaining special laws in such places suerly goes without saying, and this has indeed been recognised

in actual practice and throughout all our legislation affecting cantonments. When, therefore, I find the common law of England cited and vague denunciations directed against the measure on the ground that it encroaches upon private rights which ought to be held sacred and inviolable, my answer is that the subject is approached from the wrong standpoint and that I fail to receive the force of arguments which beg the question and have, in fact, no application to the case.

And this brings at once to the most important part of the Bill and of the opposition which it has excited. I allude to clause 3, sub-clause (5), in which it is laid down that all land in a cantonment to which the provisons of the proposed Act are, after due inquiry, applied, shall be presumed to be held under a grant from His Majesty, unless and until the person in possession proves to the satisfaction. of the Local Government that he held the land by lawful title acquired prior to the formation of the cantonment. This provision, of course, shifts the burden of proof from the Government on to the shoulders of the cantonment house-owner, and it has, perhaps not unnatually, been objected to as involving a serious interference with the rights of property. It has been urged that the presumption laid down by it is directly opposed to the ordinary legal principle which recognises possession as good prima facic evidence of little, and that it is nnfair to remove the onus probandi from the Government, on whom it ought to lie, to the house-owner. From what I have already said it will be anticipated that I cannot admit that this objection should be allowed to prevail. Cantonments are military stations, in which military considerations always have been, and always must be, regarded as paramount, and can never have been intentionally put on one side. The position of the Government with regard to them has been clear; fór, throughout all the various orders