LECTURE VI. THE PAYMENT OF REVENUE: ASSIGNMENTS OF Payment of revenue. Payment originally in kind. Payment of revenue-Payment originally in kind-Mode of ascertaining share to be paid-Payment in kind fell into disuse-Remedies for non-paymentApplication of the revenue-Jageers-Lakhiraj-Milk-Practice of assigning revenue very ancient-Growth of jageers-These grants usually of revenue and not of land-Zemindar's rights in jageer lands-Milk and muddud-mash grants-Altumghas-Jageers-Purposes for which jageers were granted-The jageer now hereditary and alienable-The conditional jageer-The unconditional jageer-Yetool-Powers and liabilities of the jageerdar-Dues to zemindars and the State-The Nizam's and Lord Clive's jageers-Tunkas-The sunnud-Seyurghal grants-Ayma grants-Malgoozary aymas-Enams and mauniums-Chakeran grants-Pykes-Services-Ghatwals-Power to resume grant-Alienations of revenue by zemindars-Allowances in the muzkooratDewusthan-Zemindars made very extensive alienations of revenue-Khewut -Rights in land-Express law-Custom - The Hindoo system one of joint property-Want of market for land and of marketable value-The soil itself not claimed by any one-The sovereign's claim to the soil-The zemindar's claim to the soil-The cultivator's claim to the soil. We have now to consider the mode in which the revenue was paid and the means of enforcing payment. This, with some description of the rights arising out of the distribution and application of the revenue, will conclude my account of the Mahomedan period. We have seen that Akbar's attempt to substitute a money payment for a payment in kind was not universally successful; and it was particularly in Bengal that it obtained only a partial acceptance. The revenue long continued, and to the present time still continues in many parts, to be paid in kind by the cultivator. But when the zemindar was employed, it was his duty to convert the share of the State into money: and, when a contract for revenue was made with him, it was made in money.1 This was, as we have seen, estimated upon an assul or original rate, primarily intended to apply to the cultivators direct, which had been determined in the modes I have before described, modes which come under the general description of nussuk or valuation.3 . LECTURE taining share The ryots, as I have said, long continued to pay in Mode of ascerkind. And they continued also, as in Behar in modern to be paid. times, to pay on the buttai system, rendering half the gross produce in kind. There were several modes in which the division was made, whatever the shares might be in which the produce was divided. In the method called agore or lang buttai, the crops were divided when on the threshing-floor; while in that called khet buttai, a portion of the field was measured off, and its produce allotted as the Government share. Again, when a valuation or estimate of the growing crop was made it was called kunkoot or danabundi. Sometimes this valuation was made by cutting a portion when ripe, threshing and weighing it, and forming an estimate thereupon. These were all ancient methods which have continued to be practised. But the equal division of the actual crop between zemindar and ryot was at one time more common than at present. The practice still prevails in the zemin 5 1 Harington's Analysis, Vol. III, 323. Fifth Report, Vol. I, 20. 3 Ayeen Akbery, Vol. I, 381; Vol. II, 9. 4 Ib., Vol. I, 377 to 379. Whinfield's Landlord and Tenant, 73. 'Whinfield's Landlord and Tenant, 73. Harington's Analysis, Vol. III, 324. LECTURE Payment in kind fell into disuse. Remedies for non-payment. dar's khamar lands, that is, lands originally waste and brought into cultivation under his auspices.1 The method of payment in kind was early considered oppressive to the ryots, as well as prejudicial to Government. It fell gradually into disuse; and it is no doubt common in Bengal for the ryot to pay in money, although the other method still survives.3 now more When the payment was in kind, the Government retained a lien upon the crop, and the cultivator was not allowed to cut or remove it until the Government claim was satisfied.* When a money payment was contracted for, the remedy for non-payment was imprisonment; or, as we have seen in the case of the zemindar, forfeiture or sale. The remedy by sale appears not to have prevailed in some parts of the country; and to have been sparingly practised in all parts. One reason was that land, at least the ryot's interest in it, was scarcely saleable, having hardly any appreciable value. But sale for arrears of revenue is stated to have been in use to some extent in Orissa and all over Bengal; and it is suggested that this practice may have given rise to the power of alienation. The method practised was that the holder of the interest to be sold purported to sell voluntarily in order to enable him to pay 1 Fifth Report, Vol. I, 140, 164. Harington's Analysis, Vol. II, 65; Vol. III, 422. Whinfield's Landlord and Tenant, 73. 2 Fifth Report, Vol. II, 25. 3 Ib., Vol. I, 140. Harington's Analysis, Vol. III, 422. Land Tenure by a Civilian, 79. The Great Rent Case, B. L. R., Supp. Vol., 254. Thomason's Selections, 128, 184. Orissa, Vol. II, 237. Evidence of Mr. Alexander before the Select Committee of the House of Commons (1832), 1533. Harington's Analysis, Vol. III, 306. the arrears of revenue, and the Government recognised the transfer upon payment into the treasury of the amount of Otherwise, the canoongoe refused to record the LECTURE the revenue. transaction, and the Government to give effect to it.' We have now traced the revenue up to the point of its Application of payment into the treasury. That revenue was then applied to the purposes of the State. The class which was to be maintained out of the revenue was called in Mahomedan law ahl, or "the people of khiraj." It consisted of the great officers of State, the civil and military establishments, and the officers of Government generally. These might be provided for in two ways; either by paying them in money out of the Exchequer, that is, by applying the khiraj for that purpose after its receipt; or by allowing them to receive a certain portion of the khiraj, either from the Government officers, the zemindars, or the ryots. When the khiraj was thus allowed to be intercepted Jageers. before its receipt into the treasury, the right so to intercept it was called a jageer. This is the general term, although as we shall see there were several varieties which bore specific names. We have already met with the term jageer as applied to one great division of the assessed land of the empire: the jageer lands which did not pay revenue into the treasury, or only paid part of it, were those from which the jageerdar himself collected either directly or through the established machinery. We have noticed the origin of these jageers in the necessity for supporting local military forces, and in the policy of allowing them to enforce the collection of the revenue 1 Orissa, Vol. II, 237. Fifth Report, Vol. I, 631. 2 Baillie's Land Tax, xxiii. LECTURE by which they were to be supported. VI. Lakhiraj. Milk. These jageer lands are sometimes called lakhiraj or free from revenue: but this is not, according to the description just given, a strictly correct term. As far as payment into the treasury is concerned, they are lakhiraj to the extent to which they are appropriated in jageers, that is, they are lakhiraj as opposed to khalsa lands. But they do pay revenue; only they pay so much as has been assigned in jageer, not into the treasury, but to the jageerdar. The revenue is alienated, not extinguished.' It is important to bear this in mind because lakhiraj land is not, or at any rate was not originally, land with the quality of being free from revenue, but land bound to pay to an assignee of the State; it is not an exemption of the land, but the right of the jageerdar, which is contemplated in the grant. It might happen that the person who was to be provided for out of the revenue was himself in occupation of land yielding revenue; as in the case of the headman, the village officers, the zemindar, and others. In such a case an obvious mode of making the required provision was by remitting the whole" or a portion of the revenue due from the land occupied by the person to be provided for; and this was sometimes done. The grantee in such a case would, during the continuance of the grant, enjoy the double right to occupy and to receive the revenue; and the only interest contemplated as remaining in any other person would be the right to receive revenue after the termination of the grant. This therefore came nearer to an absolute right than any of the rights we have at 'Baillie's Land Tax, xxvi. Land Tenure by a Civilian, 89. |