AVERAGE PRODUCE OF TEN YEARS TAKEN. 69 III. years then taken. The average produce during one season, allowing for the LECTURE different qualities of land of the same class, having thus been ascertained, it was still necessary, in order to fix the Average of ten revenue for a longer period than a year, to ascertain the average produce of different seasons. This was done by ascertaining the actual produce of various kinds of land during the preceding ten years, from the fourteenth to the twenty-fourth of the reign. The produce of the last five years of that period was ascertained from the records of the provincial or pergunnah canoongoes. But for some reason the registers of the crop of the first five years were not forthcoming; perhaps because, as afterwards happened, the canoongoe's office had shown a tendency to fall into disuse until the prospect of preparations for a settlement of this kind stirred it into life again. However this may be, the produce of the first five years of the period could only be ascertained by local enquiry, and " the representations of persons of integrity." When the produce of the ten years was thus ascertained an average of one-tenth was taken as a fair standard. The first five years of the period had however been years of plenty, which would tend to raise the average. The new rate of assessment was never- New assesstheless somewhat lower than the former rate, but the than former receipts had always fallen far short of the old assessment.1 There is some conflict amongst the authorities as to the Proportion proportion of the produce then taken by the State. It State. is said by some to have been one-third for poolej and perowty lands. Other authorities agree in this. But one 1 1 Ayeen Akbery, Vol. I, 365, 366. Fifth Report, Vol. I, 139; Vol. II, 164 to 166. Fifth Report, Vol. I, 354, 355. 3 Baillie's Land Tax, xxix. Fifth Report, Vol. I, 139. ment lower rate. taken by the III. The rebba. LECTURE authority says that one-fourth of the gross produce, or onethird of the net produce, was taken the net produce being what remained after all deductions on account of losses, village dues, &c. In the Appendix to the Fifth Report it is stated that there were several rates of assessment. If the revenue was paid in kind, the Government share of the ordinary crop was one-half, the crop being appraised on the ground: one-third was taken of crops grown out of season or artificially irrigated: and one-fourth to one-eighth of crops difficult to cultivate. But it is said that all these might be commuted for a fixed moneypayment of one-fourth of the gross produce, called the rebba, which was estimated by taking an average of the different kinds of land, and was irrespective of the actual crop cultivated. This is probably the correct account: for we know that all subsequent assessments were based upon Akbar's, or Todar Mull's as it was called; and although the amount was increased in various ways, there does not appear to have been much if any alteration in the primary assessment handed down from Akbar's time. And when Akbar's reforms had their full effect the various payments were commuted for the rebba, or fixed money-payment, of one-fourth of the gross produce, a term which was sometimes used as interchangeable with "revenue." 113 The rate of assessment, whether one-third or one-fourth, was paid by poolej land always, whether cultivated or not: but perowty land, although yielding the same rate of revenue when cultivated, rendered no revenue when unculti 211. Land Tenure by a Civilian, 128, 129, 130, 150, 151. Fifth Report, Vol. II, 165. Great Rent Case, B. L. R., Supp. Vol., 3 Fifth Report, Vol. I, 367; Vol. II, 165, 166, 235. THE OBJECT OF THE SETTLEMENT. 71 vated.' Checher and bunjer lands were taxed at lower rates than poolej land for a period, not exceeding five years, sufficient to bring them into full cultivation.o LECTURE III. rate the main settlement. The great object of Todar Mull's settlement appears to A fixed moneyhave been to substitute a fixed money-rate for the beegah object of the instead of the various rates which had prevailed under the complicated system of Hindoo times. And accordingly, either at the original settlement or very shortly afterwards, the revenue was fixed at a certain sum for the beegah, whatever might be the crop actually grown. This was called the jumma-bundy neckdy, or money settlement. The assessment was arrived at, as before described, by an average then made of the several kinds of crop which the land was capable of producing during ten years, and onefourth of the gross produce was the rebba, or state share.3 the ryot not I have already noticed the suggestion that this commuta- The position of tion of the Government claim to a share of the produce affected. for a fixed money rate was intended to be not only a formal imposition of the khiraj, but of the wuzeefa instead of the mookasumah form of that tax. It is contended that by Mahomedan law the deliberate imposition of a money-tax is a distinct recognition of the absolute proprietary rights in the soil of the cultivator; and that a substitution of the wuzeefa for the mookasumah khiraj likewise operates as a transfer of the sovereign's rights in the soil to the cultivator, and has the same effect as the formal imposition of wuzeefa khiraj. It is thence argued that, from the time of Akbar's settlement at latest, the cultivator became absolute proprietor of the 1 2 Ayeen Akbery, Vol. I, 358. Baillie's Land Tax, xxix. Ayeen Akbery, Vol. I, 360 to 364. 3 Baillie's Land Tax, xxx. Fifth Report, Vol. II, 165. * Baillie's Land Tax, xxx to xxxiii. LECTURE III. The Assul The old methods of land, at any rate where the revenue was paid in money. As I have said there is no trace of any intention to make so important a change: and it seems to me hardly safe to draw so important a legal inference from acts which the parties do not seem to have been conscious would have such effects. And it can hardly be argued that the State must be taken by implication of law to have given away its rights when its only object in making the change was to collect the revenue on an improved system, and one considered less burdensome to the ryots. Todar Mull's aim in this part of the settlement was, as before remarked, to substitute a money-revenue at a fixed rate for a revenue in kind varying with the crop. He succeeded in this to a considerable extent; and the details of assessment for each beegah of land were preserved, and thenceforward acted upon as the basis of all assessments. This assessment of Todar Mull's was always known as the Assul Toomar Jumma, or original complete assessment or rent-roll and subsequent modifications were incorporated with it, and called by the same name.1 : But although one of the main features of the settlement rendering the was the change in the mode of rendering the revenue, this still be adopted. mode was not obligatory, and the old methods might still be revenue might continued at the option of the cultivator. The cultivator might choose to pay either in kind or in money, but he was bound to make his choice of the two methods, and to adhere to one of them. There were two modes of ascertaining the Government share when paid in kind: one was called kunkoot (grain estimate), and the other, bhawely or bhaolee 1 Baillie's Land Tax, xxx. Fifth Report, Vol. I, 236. 2 Baillie's Land Tax, xxxi. Ayeen Akbery, Vol. I, 364. 3 Aycen Akbery, Vol. I, 377 to 379. THE REVENUE MIGHT STILL BE RENDERED IN KIND. 2 73 called also buttiej or buttai (division). The method known as kunkoot was to assess the crop upon the ground by estimate, and not by actual division. The other method was by actual division of the crop when gathered, or by apportioning a certain portion of the land at the sowing for the production of the revenue share." These methods have continued in use with various modifications up to the present day. But the actual division of the crops had even at this period begun in some parts to fall into disuse, the cultivators having probably come to agree with the State in regarding this mode of assessment as burdensome to the revenue-payer. And where the buttai system still prevailed, and the cultivators did not feel disposed to accept the new system, Todar Mull endeavoured to supersede the necessity for an actual division and sale by prescribing that the value of the Government share of grain might be taken in money, at the market price of the day, whenever it would not be oppressive to the ryots to do so. The buttai system continued in use in many parts of the country in spite of the advantages supposed to be offered by the other system; and a settlement upon this system was known in the south of India in later times as an aumanee settlement;* but it was chiefly in Bengal that it retained its hold; and it seems that the new settlement was less completely applied there, at least for a time, than in some other parts.6 'Ayeen Akbery, Vol. I, 377 to 379. Baillie's Land Tax, xxxi. 2 Baillie's Land Tax, xxviii. LECTURE • Baillie's Land Tax, xxxii. The details of the Assul Toomar Jumma for Bengal are given in the Fifth Report, Vol. I, 241 to 244. k * |