Customs is another principal source of revenue. The receipts for the Kashmir province for the last three years were—
| Rs. | 3,99,155 | = | £26,610 |
| Rs. | 4,84,235 | = | £32,282 |
| Rs. | 5,51,102 | = | £36,740 |
and for the whole Kashmir State—
| Rs. | 7,62,582 | = | £50,839 |
| Rs. | 8,93,438 | = | £59,562 |
| Rs. | 10,09,647 | = | £67,243 |
In describing the history of the people we have seen that one of the greatest reforms effected in the reign of the present Maharaja has been in the system of assessing and collecting the land revenue—a reform which was carried into effect mainly by Sir Walter Lawrence, who in his work on Kashmir has described at length both the old system and the one which has given it place. Of every village, with its village lands, a map was made on a scale generally of 24 inches to the mile—that is large enough to show every field accurately, and even the trees on the fields. Then in the village registers all necessary facts relating to each field were recorded, such, for instance, as the area, the class of soil, the source of irrigation, the number and description of trees on it, the name of the owner, the name of the person who cultivated it, and the amount of rent payable by the tenant, if any.
Of these entries the most important, as regards assessing the amount of land revenue to be paid, was that regarding the class of soil. This is now classified as A, irrigated land, (1) producing rice regularly; (2) producing rice occasionally, but not in every year; (3) producing other crops than rice; and B, unirrigated land, (1) manured; (2) level unmanured; (3) sloping unmanured.
The name of the "owner" was entered, but "owner" is really an incorrect term, for all land in the Kashmir valley is "owned" by the State. The actual holders have a right of occupancy as against the State as long as they pay its dues, and are practically sub-proprietors; but they have no right of alienation or mortgage.
At each harvest an official called a patwari, made a field to field inspection, and recorded in a Register the crops found in the fields. These proceedings gave the assessing officer a record of crops which formed an aid to assessment. The officer then estimated by observation, inquiry, and experimental cuttings, the yield of average fields of each class. The following are examples of some of the rates of yield:—
| Per Acre. | ||||
| a. Unhusked rice— | lbs. | lbs. | ||
| 1. In villages affected by floods | 1240 | to | 1520 | |
| 2. In villages above the floods but not too near the mountains | 1760 | " | 2600 | |
| 3. In villages close to the mountains and affected by cold winds and cold water | 1360 | " | 1800 | |
| b. Maize on unirrigated land— | ||||
| 1. By river | 1200 | " | 1600 | |
| 2. Between river and mountains | 1100 | " | 1500 | |
| 3. Near mountains | 800 | " | 1200 | |
| c. Wheat on unirrigated land— | ||||
| 1. By river | 640 | " | 720 | |
| 2. Between river and mountains | 560 | " | 640 | |
| 3. Near mountains | 500 | " | 560 | |
All this information furnished the basis on which the amount of revenue could be fixed. In old days the State claimed half the gross produce as it was stacked on the field at harvest time, and various perquisites of officials reduced the share left to the cultivator to only about one-third. Moreover, in collecting the revenue in kind there was much room for abuse and loss to both the State and the cultivator, and endless vexation. It was therefore the object of the new settlement to have the revenue paid as much as possible in cash rather than in kind, so that the occupant of a field would be able to know for certain what he would have to pay, and would not have cormorant officials hanging over his field at harvest time; and also so that the State on its side might know precisely what amount of revenue to expect in a year, and not have the trouble of collecting in kind with all its attendant risks and cost. What had to be fixed, then, was the money value of the grain which the State would otherwise have taken from the cultivator.