Letter from the Revenue Commissioner, Southern Division, No, 3195, dated 10 August 1849, with following accompaniments, relative to the observations and instructions conveyed in Government letter of 22 September 1848, No. 5593 Letter from Captain Wingate, No. 239, dated 23 December 1848 Minute on the above Letter, and accompaniments, by the Right Honourable Viscount Falkland, Letter from Captain Wingate to Government, dated 7 January 1850, No. 6, returning the 352 357 358 359 APPENDIX. A Report made to the Revenue Commissioner, under date 17 October 1840, by Mr. Goldsmid and Captain Wingate, as to the applicability to the Deccan of the plan of settlement followed in the North-Western Provinces, and furnishing information as to the Revenue System obtaining in the Deccan, and the operations carried on by the Revenue Survey Department · Letter from Captain Wingate to the Revenue Commissioner, dated 30 December 1840, No. 167, Letter from Mr. Vibart, the Revenue Commissioner, to Government, dated 15 February 1841, By Order of the Right Honourable the Governor in Council, Bombay Castle, 5 March 1850. NO. 361 372 376 [1] From H. E. Goldsmid, Esquire, Captain G. Wingate, and Captain D. Davidson, Dated 10th April 1847, No. 864. [2] From Messrs. No. 1, dated 27th October 1840. Sir, Kirkee, 2 August 1847. IN obedience to instructions from Government, conveyed in the letter noted in the margin, we have assembled at Poonah for the purpose of taking into consideration" the best means for bringing the somewhat diversified operations of the several revenue surveys of this Presidency into conformity, as far as practicable," and also "for ensuring the results of the surveys being turned to the best account, and maintained in their original integrity in the future management of the districts;" upon which points we do ourselves the honour to submit, for the consideration of the Honourable the Governor in Council, the following report. 2. Descriptions, more or less complete, of the modes of operation in use on the three surveys have been at different times already submitted to Government; but subsequent to the dates on which these were written, modifications of the then existing practices have been from time to time introduced, so that the descriptions referred to now present an imperfect, and, from the circumstances which called them forth, an unconnected view of the several systems. But, in preference to entering into a minute detail of the methods of procedure followed at present on the several surveys, we shall proceed to describe, in compliance with the intentions of Government, the principles of that system of survey, which, on a full consideration of the merits and peculiarities of the existing practices, we deem best suited for general adoption, and to be considered the standard for future operations, in so far as local peculiarities may admit. 3. A full consideration of the points mooted by Government would seem to require, in addition to the description of the system of survey and assessment, some notice of the objects to be accomplished by it, as it is only by a full comprehension of the end to be attained that we can judge of the merits of the means employed. We propose, therefore, before proceeding to describe the plan of survey we have to recommend, to submit a few observations, illustrative of the system of revenue administration to which our operations are subservient. 4. The chief design of a revenue survey may be defined to be the regulation of the customary land tax, so that it shall at once secure an adequate revenue to Government, the progressive development of the agricultural resources of the country, and the preservation of all proprietary and other rights connected with the soil. In the districts hitherto surveyed, or under survey by us, the whole land, as generally throughout India, appertains to villages; and the lands of each village are divided into fields or estates, held upon various tenures, or unoccupied, but which, in respect of taxation, may be classed under the three heads of rent-free, partially assessed, and subject to the standard assessment. 5. Under our Government, the revenue management of the districts alluded to has generally been ryotwur, but without joint responsibility, each cultivator being liable only for the land he cultivates, and renewing his engagement with Government from year to year. In some districts, each field, or subdivision of the village lands, had its particular assessment, which was either fixed, or settled from time to time, and the cultivators had, or were supposed to have, the right of relinquishing, when so disposed, any of the fields contained in their holdings, and obtaining a reduction of their liabilities, equivalent to the assessment of the lands so relinquished; in others, the assessment was laid upon the entire holding. of the cultivator, instead of its component fields; but in both cases, the practical exercise of the right of the cultivator to relinquish any part of his farm at the expiration of his annual engagement was greatly restricted by the injudicious interference of our native revenue servants, through their anxiety to keep up the cultivation and revenue of the villages or districts over which they had control. 6. The superior advantages of the field assessment over that by which the assessment is placed on the whole lands of a village, or the entire holdings of individuals or co-parceners, whether proprietors or occupants, have been already so fully stated by two of our number, in their joint report quoted in the margin, and are so generally admitted by the revenue officers of this Presidency, that we deem X. deem it unnecessary to enter upon any very detailed exposition of them here. It may be permitted us to remark, however, that one manifest advantage of breaking Revenue Survey up the assessment of a village into portions so minute is the facility it affords to and Assessment under the Bombay the cultivators of contracting or enlarging their farms from year to year, accord- Presidency. ing to the fluctuating amount of agricultural capital and stock at their disposal; which is of incalculable importance to farmers possessed of so limited resources as those of the cultivating classes throughout India. 7. The loss of a few bullocks by disease, or other causes, may quite incapacitate a ryot from cultivating profitably the extent of land he had previously in tillage; and without the privilege of contracting the extent of his farm, and consequent liabilities on occasion of such losses, his ruin would be very shortly consummated. It is for this reason that there would be no advantage, but the contrary, in binding down the cultivators by long leases, as has often been recommended. The only advantage of a long lease to a farmer is the security it affords against any increase of rent or assessment during its continuance; while, on the other hand, it has the disadvantage of increasing his risks and liabilities, in proportion to the length of the period for which it makes him responsible for the rent or assessment. The longer the lease, the greater scope for the employment of capital, but the greater the liabilities of the farmer, and risk of failure. With farmers of large capital, the security of tenure will overbalance the risk; but with farmers of small capital, the case will be reversed; and for the latter class of men in any country, it may safely be predicated that long leases, binding them to pay an invariable rent for a long series of years, are quite unsuitable. 8. To all classes of farmers, however, whether rich or poor, the tenure which affords the greatest security against increase of rent, with the least extent of liability and risk of loss, is undoubtedly that most favourable to the interests of the agricultural classes, and to the progressive increase of farming capital; and it is evident that this can only be effected by shifting the risk from the tenant to the landlord, and securing to the former all the advantages and security of a long lease, without its attendant liabilities. In countries where the land is divided into properties of limited extent, landlords could not be expected to incur this risk, when it is so easy to shift it on their tenants, and secure their own rents; but the case is altogether different when the whole or a large portion of the landrent is levied by Government. In the latter case, the interests of the rentpayer and rent-receiver are identical. With a Government, the question is not the certainty and amount of rent derivable from one estate, without reference to aught beyond its boundaries, but from the country at large. The land-tax is obtained, not from a few individual farmers, but from the whole agricultural community; and its amount will fluctuate with the circumstances of the latter. With every diminution of the total amount of capital employed in agriculture, the land revenue will decline; with every increase, it will improve. The maximum of farming capital and land revenue will be the same, as will also be their fluctuations. It appears, therefore, that in opposition to the case of an [3] ordinary landowner, Government incurs neither risk of loss, nor additional liabilities, by giving the cultivator all the advantages of a long lease, and at the same time relieving him of its attendant disadvantages. 9. The important end here pointed out we believe to be fully attained by the fixed field assessment of our surveys, administered by annual leases. The cultivator's title to the occupation of his fields is indestructible, while he continues to discharge the assessment laid upon them, though his engagement for each be annually renewed; and by placing the assessment upon each field, instead of on his whole holding, he is enabled, when circumstances make the course desirable, to relinquish any of the former, or take up others which may be unoccupied, so as to accommodate the extent of his liabilities to his means to meet them. The fixed field assessment for the term of 30 years, introduced by our surveys, thus secures to the cultivator the full advantages of a 30 years' lease, without burdening him with any condition beyond that of discharging the assessment for the single year to which his engagement extends. He has thus all the security of tenure which the longest lease could confer, without the attendant liabilities and risk which his limited capital and precarious circumstances would be quite inadequate to meet. 10. The main objects, then, of our surveys is the imposition of a field assessment, and we are now to consider the most suitable means for accomplishing this. X. Revenue Survey and Assessment under the Bombay Presidency. [4] 11. The first question presenting itself for consideration is the definition of the field. In every village, as already stated, there are recognized subdivisions of the village lands, which, for the most part, have distinctive appellations, and have existed from time immemorial; many of these, however, known as Thuls, Tickas, Daghs, and by other denominations, are of large size, and in the possession of several individuals. Their external boundaries may be considered permanent, but the limits of their interior portions in the possession of distinct parties are subject to change, through the operation of sales, transfers, annexations, partitions, and so forth. Occasionally, also, an old subdivision, though of large size, may be held by a single individual of larger means than usual; another, again, though not beyond, and even within the average size, may be partitioned very minutely amongst a numerous co-parcenary, especially in the case of Meeras lands, which are inherited by the Hindoo common law of equal partition among the male descendants, on the death of the common ancestor. Such minor subdivisions are continually subject to change, from the causes just mentioned, and others; and finally, large tracts of waste, and even cultivated lands, in which all trace of the original subdivisions has been lost, are not uncommon. 12. To secure the advantages of the field assessment described in our preceding observations, it is obviously requisite that the fields upon which the assessment is distributed should be of a size suitable to the circumstances of the cultivators, so as to admit of their being readily cultivated by ryots of limited means. This could not be accomplished by constituting the ancient thuls and daghs into fields, as these would be generally too large for our purpose; while, on the other hand, to make a field of every one of their interior subdivisions, as they exist at the time of survey, would greatly increase the labour and expense of the operation, without an adequate object; for such holdings are subject to frequent change, as already explained, and no advantage that we are aware of is to be gained by making permanent a state of things which, though representing at the time of survey the distribution of the village lands amongst the members of the community, would not continue to do so after the lapse of a very few years. 13. In the division of the village lands into fields, the chief points to be kept in view appear to be,— 1st. That the fields, or at least a majority of them, should not be larger than may be cultivated by ryots of limited means. 2d. That they should not be made smaller than is necessary for the above object, without an adequate reason. The former of these points may readily be determined by the extent of land capable of being cultivated by a pair of bullocks, as farming cannot be prosecuted at all with a less number than this. When a ryot has only a single bullock, he must enter into partnership with a neighbour, or obtain a second by some means or other, in order to be able to cultivate at all. 14. The extent of land capable of being cultivated with a pair of bullocks will vary according to climate, soil, description of cultivation and methods of husbandry. In very dry climates, as the Deccan, where the soil is kept free of grass and weeds with comparative ease, the extent of the land will be greater than in moister districts, where vegetation is more vigorous, other circumstances connected with the cultivation being the same. A larger breadth of light, friable soils may of course be kept in tillage, with the same labour, than of heavier descriptions. In districts where manure is generally applied to the soils, the area capable of being cultivated will be much less than when no manure is applied. The difference between dry crop and irrigated lands will be still greater. 15. The actual extent of the several descriptions of land capable of being cultivated as above may, however, be easily ascertained in the case of any district about to be surveyed. Let us suppose, for the sake of illustration, the following to be the number of acres cultivable by a pair of bullocks in a particular district : These areas would, we are of opinion, form the most convenient size of fields, as a general rule; but other circumstances require consideration. 16. It X. and Assessment 16. It is of much importance that the existing state of things in any village should be as little interfered with as conveniently practicable, and consequently Revenue Survey that the holdings of different proprietors and cultivators, and land held upon under the Bombay different tenures, should not, when avoidable, be included in the same field; and Presidency. though cultivators, possessing only a pair of bullocks, are numerous, those with a greater number are more numerous still, so that fields of double the size of the standard we have proposed might be cultivated, and made the subject of transfer, &c., without difficulty, 17. On taking into account these and various other circumstances affecting the question, but which could not be clearly explained without entering into a greater detail than would be suitable in a report such as this, we are led to propose the following general rules for the division of village lands into fields : RULES. 1st. The number of acres for each description of soil and culture, capable of cultivation by a single pair of bulls, having been determined, the size of the fields should be so regulated as to contain from this to double this number of acres. 2d. The preceding rule does not apply to tracts of land incapable of cultivation, or unsuited for it in their present state, from the presence of dense jungle, or other obstructions, which should be divided into as large portions as may be convenient. 3d. Land held upon different tenures, as Meeras, Gutkool, Enam, Joodee, &c., should be measured separately, and not together, in the same field, even when of smaller area than required by Rule 1. 4th. Different kinds of culture, as dry crop, rice, garden, &c., when in [5] conformity with the usage of the district, should, as far as conveniently practicable, be measured into distinct fields. 5th. Every holding,* falling within the limits prescribed in Rule 1, should be constituted a survey field. 6th. Every holding in excess of these dimensions should be divided into two or more fiel.is, so as to bring the area of each within them. 7th. When a holding is of less area than the limit laid down in Rule 1, and there are other holdings on the same tenure contiguous to it, and also of less area than the rule prescribes, so many of these are to be clubbed together to form a new field as may be requisite to bring the acres of the latter within the limit, but no more. 8th. When a holding of less area than required by Rule 1, does not adjoin another holding, similarly circumstanced, it should be made a separate field, notwithstanding its deficient size. 18. These rules would preserve the existing divisions of the land to as great an extent as seems necessary or desirable; for the subdivision of any large holding, under Rule 1, into fields of a convenient size for cultivation, will in no way affect the existing rights of the occupant, as the external boundaries, and extent of his land, will remain unchanged. The only other case in which existing usage could at all be interfered with is, that of two or more inconveniendly minute holdings being thrown into one survey field, under the provisions of Rule 6; but such instances would be of rare occurrence, and the field thus formed so small, that there would be no difficulty whatever in arranging for the payment of its assessment by the several shareholders. 19. The size of the holdings having been determined, the next question that suggests itself is the best mode of defining their limits, and of securing the preservation of the boundaries, when defined. 20. A continuous ridge or mound of earth encompassing the field is doubtless the best boundary; but such was found on trial to be too expensive, and a system of partial ridging at the angles, and at intervals along the sides, with stones sunk at the corners and bends, has proved sufficient for practical purposes. 21. The number and size of these marks must be regulated by local circunstances, and we do not, therefore, propose any specific rule on the subject, further 66 than By holding" we mean any field, estate or occupancy, contained within a continuous line of boundary, and in the possession of one person or co-parcenary. |