________________
to tax the pilgrims visiting the Hill. These two are of course, mutually interwined; and they necessarily act and react on one another. But,
or the sake of clarity and convenience, let us consider them severally, and as if either of them had no bearing one the other.
QUESTION OF JURISDICTION.
In considering this question, we must remember, as is clear from the historical outline given in the previous articles, that the Jains have been in possession and ownership of this Hill, long before the present ruling family of Palitana came anywhere near the neighbourhood of the Hill. Surely it is a most elementary and incontestable principle of prescription, were there no other basis for the Jain claim, that those who have been in unquestioned possession of a property for a length of time computed by centuries should be considered to have a better right to ownership and jurisdiction arising therefrom than those who came into the concern only a little over two hundred and fifty years ago. Even when the Palitana Thakore came upon the Hill, he came there distinctly and specifically as a retainer of the Jain community. With them he agreed, for a consideration payable in kind and cash, to discharge the police fusotion of watch-and-ward, and to guarantee a measure of protection to the pilgrim visitors
