in the event of arrears accruing, and a sale being deemed necessary (except in cases where the sacrifice on account of purchase money would be very great) the zemindary tenure should be bought on the part of the Government, and a settlement made on the ryotwar principle. Under the Bengal presidency this instruction has not been acted upon to any extent. Under the Madras presidency, it has been already stated, that a large portion of the country, formerly settled under the zemindary tenure, has reverted to Government.

The purchase and resumption of the rights imprudently conceded to the zemindars is undoubtedly the least exceptionable method of remedying the evil of their existence; but a serious objection lies against it, arising from the outlay of money required to carry it into effect to any considerable extent. For this reason Mr. Campbell suggests that it would be desirable, without changing the existing law rendering the zemindary tenure saleable for arrears, in practice to suspend its operation, and on an arrear, accruing, to attach and continue the attachment of the land revenue, and to introduce a ryotwar field assessment. This plan may, probably, be adopted with some benefit where the purchase of the right by Government is impracticable or inexpedient; but as the suspension of the zemindars' right would be only temporary, it does not appear very easy to see

how

how we should be legally justified in interfering between the ryots and himself, except upon the principle that extreme evils justify the application of extreme remedies, which, if acted upon, might carry us much farther than Mr. Campbell's proposal. Whenever the zemindars' right can be altogether annihilated (except in cases of ancient claim), this course will be preferable. The mischief arising from a sale to any private purchaser need not be dwelt upon. The elevation of low men to the possession of power, extending even to oppression and extortion; the consequent insecurity of all previous engagements, and other evils at once occur to the mind, and attest that the practice ought not to be continued. Two other suggestions by Mr. Campbell deserve consideration. One is, that in future, if the zemindary tenure should in any case be sold to a private purchaser, materially to modify that harsh and oppressive rule, which renders voidable all engagements between the cultivators and the former zemindar. He proposes that this should be the exception instead of the rule, and that all engagements except those which should be found to have originated in collusion or fraud, should be maintained. The justice of this proposal is too obvious to require argument to enforce it, and as it would not injuriously affect any existing rights, it is difficult to discover any valid objection to it.

The

The second suggestion relates to the office of village accountant. Mr. Campbell regards it as a great error of the permanent settlement, that this office has been suffered either to fall into disuse, or to be held entirely subject to the zemindars. It was the duty of this officer, after the rates payable by the cultivators had been adjusted, to register them as the recorder of the Government, for the mutual guidance of the payers and receivers. In 1816-17, some measures were taken for the reform of the office; but Mr. Mill represents them as not having succeeded. Mr. Campbell thinks it of the highest importance that, in the permanently settled districts, it should be efficiently restored, and that the holders of it should be emancipated from the control of the zemindars, and declared the servants of Government exclusively.

Throughout a large portion of India, the inhabitants are associated in communities constituting villages, each village having its officers of different classes, and the whole community being united by various common ties. The advantages of this institution are described by Sir Charles Metcalfe with extraordinary beauty and eloquence in the following passage from one of his able mi

nutes:

"The village communities are little republics, having nearly every thing that they want within themselves,

themselves, and almost independent of any foreign relations. They seem to last where nothing else lasts. Dynasty after dynasty tumbles down, revolution succeeds to revolution, Hindoo, Patan, Mogul, Mahratta, Siek, English, are all masters in their turn; but the village communities remain the same. In times of trouble they arm and fortify themselves: a hostile army passes through the country: the village communities collect their cattle within their walls, and let the enemy pass unprovoked. If plunder and devastation be directed against themselves, and the force employed be irresistible, they flee to friendly villages at a distance; but when the storm has passed over they return and resume their occupations. If a country remain for a series of years the scene of continued pillage and massacre, so that the villages cannot be inhabited, the scattered villagers nevertheless return whenever the power of peaceable possession revives. A generation may pass away; but the succeeding generation will return. The sons will take the places of their fathers; the same site for the village, the same positions for the houses; the same lands will be re-occupied by the descendants of those who were driven out when the village was depopulated; and it is not a trifling matter that will drive them out, for they will often maintain their post through times of disturbance and convulsion; and acquire strength sufficient to

resist pillage and oppression with success. This union of the village communities, each one forming a separate little state in itself, has, I conceive, contributed more than any other cause to the preservation of the people of India, through all the revolutions and changes which they have suffered, and is, in a high degree, conducive to their happiness, and to the enjoyment of a great portion of freedom and independence. I wish, therefore, that the village constitutions may never be disturbed, and I dread every thing that has a tendency to break them up.'

The political views embodied in the above extract are as sound as the language in which they are clothed is picturesque and forcible. A system which, through successive and protracted scenes of war and rapine, preserves the elements of property and civilization for the reconstruction of the social edifice in calmer times, has strong claims on the protection of an enlightened and paternal government; and it is gratifying to find such sentiments entertained by the statesmen of India. The principle of corporations is one admirably adapted to stability, and though a certain class of political reasoners may take a different view, the stability of social institutions will ever be regarded by the reflecting as an object which it is one of the first duties of a legislator to secure. A corporation or an associated community like an Indian village

may