confequently my opinion was ftrengthened; but from the above paffage of Mr. Roufe's book I fhould have believed that the other answers obtained by the Bengal government, in 1787, were not fo conclufive to Mr. Roufe's argument as those in 1773, otherwife he would have published them, instead of reprinting thofe answers* which Mr. Francis had published †, if he had not told us that he had "inspected all the material proceedings of the Company's administration at home and abroad, fince 1773, any ways relating to Zemindars, (except fome that may have arrived within this last twelvemonth) and I declare I have not seen any thing like the contradictions fuggefted by Mr. Grant ." Mr. Grant's letter to Sir John Shore §, to which Mr. Roufe's differtation is an answer, ought to have directed Mr. Roufe to the examination of the Bengal revenue papers received in 1789 and 90, and he should have made every inquiry before he ventured to infi * Rouse's Differtation, Appendix, No. 8. § Inquiry into Zemindary tenures, Appendix, No. 3. nuate that Mr. Grant would feem to in vite this country to retract its plighted faith in their favour*;" particularly as, in the page preceding, he had faid with candor, "I must do this gentleman (Mr. Grant) the credit to fay, that his fentiments are here delivered without any tincture of party spirit or perfonal invective, except only against the Mahomedan and Hindoo officers, whofe opinions have been "quoted by Mr. Francis." Leaving therefore the controverfy of these refpectable and able gentlemen, I shall state the answers above mentioned, which I confider conclufive against the fashionable definition of Zemindar: yet I am very far from imputing blame to the different administrations in Bengal for confulting their native officers, under the impreffions of caution. The opinions contained in the following papers, may be faid to evidence the opinion of the Carnatic and of the Decan, of Oude and of Bengal. * Differtation, p. 22. Tranflation of Eight Questions propofed by Colonel John Murray. Question I. Who is the proprietor of the land or foil; the Hakim (that is, the Governor) or the Zemindar?· Question II. What is the origin of the jurifdiction, or authority of the Zemindar? Question III. What are the actual rights of the Zemindar? Question IV. What is the nature of the Zemindar's power and authority? Question V. What is the origin of the jurifdiction, the rights and power of the Jageerdars? Question VI. What is the actual jurifdiction and authority of the Talookdars? Question VII. In what manner ufed the Zemindars and Talookdars to discharge their feveral obligations of Mal-guzari and Nal-bundi to Go vernment? and what was the nature of the fervices rendered by fageerdars? Queftion VIII. What were the ancient limits and nature refpectively of the jurifdiction, rights, and powers of Zemindars, Talookdars, and Jageerdars? how were the feveral claims of the ftate as Nal-bun li, Mul-guzari, and Services afcertained and regulated? and in what manner are thefe points at present fettled? N. B. The originals had been sent by Colonel Murray to Mr. Dundas before I was favoured with the translation. Tranflation of the Anfwers of his Highness the Nabob Amul ul Omrah Heir Apparent of the Carnatic to the aforefaid eight Questions, Anfwer to the First Question, The proprietor of the foil is the King; the King constitutes the Hakim (or Governor) his deputy; the Hakim appoints the Zemindar. Anfwer to the Second Question. The authority of the Zemindar is derived from the Hakim, and subsists as long as the * latter pleases. Answer to the Third Question. The actual rights of the Zemindar confift in this; he brings wafte lands into cultivation; and the Hakim grants him for the fame an exemption from taxes (that is, he holds fuch lands tax free.) |