LECTURE
VI.

These grants usually of revenue and not of land.

what a departure from the principle of centralisation, it was recommended by its great immediate convenience. And by the time of Jaffier Khan a considerable portion of the revenue of Bengal had been thus assigned. Jaffier Khan resumed many of these assignments granting others in Orissa. In this he imitated the policy of Akbar, who directed that the jageers should be frequently changed to prevent the troops establishing themselves in any one place.1 The creation of the new jageers however did not get rid of this danger, for we find that many of the holders of them afterwards revolted. After Jaffier Khan, Cossim Ali followed, in this as in other respects, the same policy, resuming many jageers and compelling the holders of others to account for the surplus revenue withheld by them.3

Grants of revenue or of land free from revenue were made for various purposes, such as past services; for services to be rendered during the term of the grant; as a provision for the great officers of State or needy persons of high rank; for charitable purposes; for the maintenance of temples, mosques, teachers, priests, and for other religious purposes. Such grants did not in general alienate the revenue in perpetuity. The sovereign indeed could not, according to Mahomedan ideas, permanently alienate the revenue: and therefore, when it was intended that the grant should extend beyond the lifetime of the sovereign granting it, the grant generally contained an appeal to his

'Stewart's History of Bengal, 107.

2 Harington's Analysis, Vol. II, 66.

'Fifth Report, Vol. I, 294, 296, 306, 307 to 309.

4 Morley's Digest, Vol. I, 401.

Fifth Report, Vol. II, 14. Baillie's Land Tax, xxiv to xxvi.

successors to continue it.' And all alienations of revenue
were registered in the tun-dufter at Delhi, and were revised
at the beginning of a new reign; when the grants were either
confirmed or resumed at the will of the new sovereign.?
These grants ordinarily only transferred the revenue and
not the land: although in some cases land appears to have
been also granted, as in some milk and muddud-mash grants,
as also in some altumgha grants: but in such cases it was
probably land at the disposition of the State as being waste
or deserted land, or perhaps frontier land from which the
holders had been ejected. At any rate we cannot find any
instance in which the ryots were ejected in order to put
the grantee in possession of the land itself: and if the
cultivators remained in possession under the same right as
before, they would of course still continue to pay revenue;
only to the jageerdar instead of to the State. It is expressly
stated that the Emperor purchases land when he requires
it for building a mosque; one of the few purposes, it may
be observed, for which the land itself would be required.
And a grant for purposes of this kind comes under the
head of muddud-mash grants; the grantees of which, like
the holders of milk, were usually entitled to the land,
as well as to the revenue. If the grantee under these
grants was already the occupant of the land, the grant

1 Baillie's Land Tax, li.

* Land Tenure by a Civilian, 57,

89.

' Harington's Analysis, Vol. III, 329, 369. Steele's Deccan Castes, 206. Land Tenure by a Civilian, 90. Directions for Revenue Officers,

59.

• Harington's Analysis, Vol. III, 328. Some of the grants of the Hindoo rulers, which have been discovered, and which were inscribed on copper plates, are however in very absolute terins. See Colebrooke's Essays (London: Trübner and Co., 1873), Vol. III, Nos. xi and xii.

LECTURE

VI.

LECTURE

VI.

Zemindar's rights in jageer lands.

196

JAGEER LANDS IN ZEMINDARIES.

remitted the revenue. On the other hand, it would seem that if the land was in the possession of others, and the possession of it was desired for the purposes of the grant, the land had to be purchased: but in the case of waste or unoccupied land, the sovereign himself would be entitled to dispose of it. Thus the ghatwals, who guarded the frontier passes, seem to have occupied land free of revenue; and such frontier land would probably come within the class of lands of which the sovereign could lawfully dispose. In further illustration of this point, an instance may be given from the south of India: for it is stated that in Canara, when a grant of this kind was made to a pagoda, the soil did not pass, but only the right to receive the revenue; and that when the soil was granted, the previous purchase of it was expressly mentioned in the sunnud.1

Assignments of revenue were sometimes made in respect of lands included in zemindaries: if the revenue continued to be collected by the zemindar, he of course retained the usual emoluments, merely paying to the assignee of the revenue the amount he was bound to pay as revenue, instead of paying it into the khalsa. If there were no zemindars in the assigned district, from which the allotted revenue was to be received, the jageerdar collected the revenue and administered the district through the Government officers, or agents of his own, who would either receive an allowance similar to that taken by the zemindar, or would be paid for their services in money out of the revenue. If however the assignee of the revenue displaced the zemindar, as appears to have been the case in many instances in Behar, the zemindar, whose right had

Fifth Report, Vol. II, 479.

become at this period a proprietary and not merely an official right, was compensated by the usual allowance of malikana made to displaced zemindars.1

3

2

LECTURE

VI.

dud-mash

The most absolute grant of this kind was, as I have said, Milk and mudthe milk or millik grant, a class which includes some of the grants. muddud-mash grants (prolonging of life). This grant was on condition of performing certain services; or for the support of the grantees without services; or for religious purposes. The grant was in terms implying perpetuity, and mentioning the heirs or children as included among the grantees, but the grant was in practice revocable at the will of the sovereign. There is a conflict as to whether the grant was heritable, notwithstanding that the terms used implied perpetuity and descent. Sir George Campbell says that the right, if not resumed, went to the heirs of the grantor; but it is contended by one writer that the terms of the grant, including the children of the immediate grantee amongst the objects of the grant, must be taken to refer to a joint interest in the children with the parent.5 As I have mentioned the land was sometimes included in this kind of grant; and in all cases of milk grants the land was either granted, or was originally held by the grantee; and since the land descended in the ordinary course, the right to hold it free of revenue would naturally attend it until the expiration or revocation of the grant: so that practically it was an hereditary grant.6

1

1 Harington's Analysis, Vol. III, 345.

Ayeen Akbery, Vol. I, 281.

Land Tenure by a Civilian, 89. Baillie's Land Tax, xlviii. Campbell's Cobden Club Essay, 153.

355.

Cobden Club Essay, 153. Harington's Analysis, Vol. III, 337, 338,

Baillie's Land Tax, lxiii.

• Land Tenure by a Civilian, 55, 56. Baillie's Land Tax, xlviii,

LECTURE

VI.

Altumghas.

I have referred to the circumstances under which a grant of the land itself could be made, and in further illustration of this I may mention that the sunnud under the Imperial seal, by which the formal grant was made, sometimes expresses that "the land shall not be assessed land, but shall be selected from waste land capable of cultivation and not under assessment." And in the case of some grants of this kind, the land was to be half arable and half waste."

The milk holding is said to have been transferable; but it could not be alienated so as to give an irrevocable right.3 The grant generally extended only to lands of small extent, seldom including more than a thousand beegahs.*

Similar in some respects to the last mentioned grant was the altumgha grant,5 which was under the Emperor's red seal, and was a grant of revenue of land under cultivation. This, like the last class, was not strictly perpetual, but is said only to have reverted to the State on failure of heirs, or on forfeiture for misconduct. It was intended to be hereditary; and the sunnud contained generally an appeal by the sovereign to his successors to confirm his grant. It was apparently the only grant in the Mahomedan system which was originally intended to be hereditary.3 Such grants were rare, and were chiefly found in Behar.

Baillie's Land Tax, xxv, lv. Land Tenure by a Civilian, 55, 56, 89, 90.

2 Baillie's Land Tax, xlix. Ayeen Akbery, Vol. I, 383. 'Land Tenure by a Civilian, 56. Campbell's Cobden Club Essay, 153. Orissa, Vol. II, 238.

Land Tenure by a Civilian, 89.

5 Colebrooke's Supplement, 238.

• Ib.

7 Baillie's Land Tax, li. Land Tenure by a Civilian, 56.

Fifth Report, Vol. II, 168. Harington's Analysis, Vol. II, 66; Vol. III, 337, 338.