being Persian terms, survivals from the Revenue System of the Muhammadan Empire. How far may we use the original words in a book of this kind, and how far should we use translations? No doubt the plain rule is, when writing English, to use English words. But in matters of land-revenue and land-tenure there are necessarily many of the local and general terms which have no exact English equivalent; they represent institutions, offices, customs and forms of proceeding which do not belong to anything English or in England. Sooner or later the reader will find it necessary to know familiarly a few of the common landterms, and when he has mastered the not very onerous task, he will find the vernacular words both shorter and more expressive than any attempted English substitutes. I cannot pretend to any system in determining when to use an English and when an Indian term; I can only trust to the method adopted proving practically convenient. I have everywhere used the English word 'village' as Village, the commonly accepted equivalent for the group of lands which is called in Revenue or official language 'Mauza' or 'Dih' (P.), or in Hindi dialects gánw, grúma, gaum, &c. But the reader will at once understand that by 'village' we do not mean a small collection of houses with a green, a few shops, and a church-spire rising above the 'immemorial elms'; we mean always a group of landholdings aggregatel in one place; there is generally one, or more than one, group of dwellings situated somewhere in the area, and the 'village' has a common tank, graveyard and cattlestand, and probably an area of scrub jungle and grazing ground attached to it. Again, I may well use the English term Headman to 'Hond indicate the person who in some forms of village tenure is man.' an essential part of the community,-an hereditary officer of some consideration. Even where such a person is not essential to the social constitution of the village, the Government has generally appointed or recognized a headman in some form or other, because it is more convenient to deal with one man and make him the medium of communication and the representative. At the same time, while the English does well enough to replace the great variety of local names names that exist1, it does not distinguish between one form and another, as the Lambar vernacular does. The term 'lambardár,' for example, for the headman, in the North Indian and Central Provinces villages, at once indicates that we are speaking of a village of the joint type of which we shall afterwards hear, while Patel Mandal' or 'Pátel' at once suggests the other type of village prevailing in Bengal and in Southern India. dár,' 'Patwari.' Another very common Indian revenue term is Patwárí, meaning the person who keeps the village accounts, and, above all, looks after the maps and records of rights, and registers changes in land proprietorship and in tenancies. Some books call him 'village accountant,' others' village registrar,' but neither term is satisfactory. Synonymous with Putwúrí (in Northern India and the Central Pro'Karnam.' vinces) is the name 'Karnam' in the South, and 'Kulkarní' in the West. 'Kul karni,' 'Raiyat.' I am tempted to illustrate my point by one or two more examples, because they will serve at the outset to explain the most frequently used terms, which will occur at every page almost of our reading. The word 'ryot,' as it is incorrectly written, is familiar as a word to English readers, and they mostly suppose it to mean 'tenant.' So it does to a certain extent; but it marks also that it is 'tenant' of a sort which does not necessarily arise out of any contract between a landlord and a cultivator. I write it 'raiyat' to save trouble, though in strict accuracy it is' ra'iyat' (A.), meaning 'subject, protected,' &c. In Bengal it has always been the custom to call the village cultivators under the persons constituted landlords 'The village headman was 'Patel' all over Central and Western India, 'Mandal' in Bengal, and in the North 'Muqaddam'; but there are many other local names. In the joint-villages of Northern India the headman is not a natural part of the system. He is only one among the heads of families selected to represent them with the Government, and primarily to pay in the revenue due by the body. in 1793, as 'raiyats'; and we shall see the term continued in the latest Tenancy law of Bengal. Some of these are modern contract-tenants, but a great many are really the descendants of the original clearers and settlers, who would have been regarded as owners of their holdings, but for subsequent historical circumstances and changes. ५ But perhaps the commonest use of the term is to signify the landholder who does not claim-or at any rate has long lost any tangible right to-the ownership of anything beyond his own field or fields. Such landowners exist all over Bombay, Madras, and indeed in other parts, whereever what we shall presently describe as the 'landlord village' has not come into sight, owing to the growth of a landlord class. Technically, the position of such a landholder may be differently defined in different parts. The Bombay Revenue Code calls him 'occupant,' and defines his rights. There is no Code in Madras and no definition, but judicial decisions have recognized the occupant who pays revenue as de facto proprietor of his holding. Hence it is very convenient to have a term like 'raiyat' to indi. cate the members of village communities of a certain type; and especially because in its compound form we can talk of . a Raiyat-wárí village, and of the Settlement being Raiyat- 'Raiyat wár-meaning that each occupant is separately assessed 'Raiyat for his own field without responsibility for anything else, war." as opposed to the Bengal 'Zamíndárí' system, where one landlord engages for the revenue of a considerable-sometimes a very large-area, including many villages; or to the 'village' system where a smaller estate-very often a single village-is settled for, and assessed at a lump sum, the body of co-sharers of the village or estate being in theory jointly and severally liable for the whole, and arranging among themselves, according to their own custom and constitution, how much of the total each has to contribute. wári.' Another convenient term is 'jama', and its derivative ‘Jama.' 'jamabandi.' 'Jama' is Arabic for 'total,' and means the entire revenueassessment (exclusive of certain road, education and other 'Jama. bandi.' cesses separately levied under special laws). To say that is 16 Rs. 8 as.' 'Jamabandi' is the account 'fixing' or definitely recording (bandi) the Revenue demand (Jama'). In raiyatwárí provinces it has this meaning quite intact. Every year an account is made out showing what fields each raiyat has held, and what revenue (jama') he has accordingly become liable for. Under other systems the term has naturally become modified in meaning. In the North-West and Central Provinces, for example, it has come to mean the list of the tenants and their rents. In the Panjab it has come to mean a complete record of right, a list showing concisely every holder of land, whether co-sharing proprietor or tenant cultivating (under a co-sharer or under the whole body jointly), and the payment, whether revenue or rent, due from each. I do not think that terms like these gain anything by attempted translations or equivalents, and I have described the meaning at some length, with the double object of justifying my retaining the original words, and also, at the same time, familiarizing the reader with the words. If he will make himself at home with the terms (headman) lambardár' and 'pátel'; with 'raiyat,' 'jama' ' and 'jamabandi,' he will have taken a useful step forward. 10. Connection of the Land-Revenue Administration with other branches. One other topic demands perhaps a few words of explanation: why is it that the systems of Land-Revenue Administration are of so much importance in India, that everybody who aims at understanding the Administration generally, must understand this first? The present book had its origin in a desire to bring a class of public officers-those who have the care of the State Forests in India-into closer contact with the civil administration; and it was felt that to let them understand the land system was the best way to begin. But for every other class of public officer, and for the economist who interests himself in the welfare of India, the comprehension of the broad features of land-revenue administration is hardly less necessary, if the reasons are less direct or less easily stated'. The State derives its principal revenue from the land: it has done so at all times, and the people are accustomed to pay it: it is with them the very nature of things. The collection, when once the assessment is arranged for a term of years, is effected without inquisitorial proceedings and without trouble or extortion. The population is so largely agricultural, and the different classes so wedded to custom, that the speculative administrator who should conceive the idea of getting rid of the land-revenue would soon find himself in a position of difficulty which language could hardly do justice to. The 'land-tax' in England is only one item, and not a very large one, among a host of other taxes; it falls on a small class. In India the land-revenue is a totally different thing. With the necessity for fairly adjusting tho amount of revenue which each class of land has to pay, comes the necessity of thoroughly understanding the agricultural conditions of the country, the caste of the people as it affects their cultivating capacity, the modes of holding land, the interests each class has in the land, and |