The administration of gaols in India can be described more favourably. As a rule, there is one gaol in each district, under the management of the civil surgeon. Discipline is well maintained, though separate confinement Gaols. is practically unknown; and various industries (especially carpet-weaving) are profitably pursued wherever possible. So much attention has been directed to diet and sanitation that the death-rate compares well with that of the general working population: in 1907 it was as low as 18 per 1000. Convicts with more than six years to serve are transported to the Andaman Islands, where the penal settlement is organized on an elaborate system, permitting ultimately self-support on a ticket of leave and even marriage. In 1907 the daily average gaol population in India was 87,306, while the convicts in the Andamans numbered 14,235.
Local self-government, municipal and rural, in the form in which it now prevails in India, is essentially a product of British rule. Village communities and trade gilds in towns existed previously, but these were only rudimentary forms of Municipalities. self-government. The beginnings of municipal government occurred in the Presidency towns. Apart from these the act of 1850 respecting improvements in towns initiated consultative committees. In 1870 Lord Mayo delegated to local committees the control over these improvement funds. But the system at present in force is based upon legislation by Lord Ripon in 1882, providing for the establishment of municipal committees and local boards, whose members should be chosen by election with a preponderance of non-official members. The large towns of Calcutta, Bombay and Madras have municipalities of this character, and there are large numbers of municipal committees and local boards all over the country. There are also Port Trusts in the great maritime cities of Calcutta, Bombay, Madras, Karachi and Rangoon.
As the land furnishes the main source of Indian revenue, so the assessment of the land tax is the main work of Indian administration. No technical term is more familiar to Anglo-Indians, and none more strange to the Land Settlement. English public, than that of land settlement. No subject has given rise to more voluminous controversy. It will be enough in this place to explain the general principles upon which the system is based, and to indicate the chief differences of application in the several provinces. That the state should appropriate to itself a direct share in the produce of the soil is a fundamental maxim of Indian finance that has been recognized throughout the East from time immemorial. The germs of rival systems can be traced in the old military and other service tenures of Assam, and in the poll tax of Burma, &c. The exclusive development of the land system is due to two conditions,—a comparatively high state of agriculture and an organized plan of administration,—both of which are supplied by the primitive village community. During the lapse of untold generations, despite domestic anarchy and foreign conquest, the Hindu village has in many parts preserved its simple customs, written in the imperishable tablets of traditions. The land was not held by private owners but by occupiers under the petty corporation; the revenue was not due from individuals, but from the community represented by its head-man. The aggregate harvest of the village fields was thrown into a common fund, and before the general distribution the head-man was bound to set aside the share of the state. No other system of taxation could be theoretically more just, or in practice less obnoxious to the people. Such is an outline of the land system as it may be found at the present day throughout large portions of India both under British and native rule; and such we may fancy it to have been universally before the Mahommedan conquest. The Mussulmans brought with them the avarice of conquerors, and a stringent system of revenue collection. Under the Mogul empire, as organized by Akbar the Great, the share of the state was fixed at one-third of the gross produce of the soil; and a regular army of tax-collectors was permitted to intervene between the cultivator and the supreme government. The entire vocabulary of the present land system is borrowed from the Mogul administration. The zamindar himself is a creation of the Mahommedans, unknown to the early Hindu system. He was originally a mere tax-collector, or farmer of the land revenue, who agreed to furnish a lump sum from the tract of country assigned to him. If the Hindu village system may be praised for its justice, the Mogul farming system had at least the merit of efficiency. Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb extracted a larger land revenue than the British do. When the government was first undertaken by the East India Company, no attempt was made to understand the social system upon which the land revenue was based. The zamindar was conspicuous and useful; the village community and the cultivating ryot did not force themselves into notice. The zamindar seemed a solvent person, capable of keeping a contract; and his official position as tax-collector was confused with the proprietary rights of an English landlord. The superior stability of the village system was overlooked, and in the old provinces of Bengal and Madras the village organization has gradually been suffered to fall into decay. The consistent aim of the British authorities has been to establish private property in the soil, so far as is consistent with the punctual payment of the revenue. The annual government demand, like the succession duty in England, is universally the first liability on the land; when that is satisfied, the registered landholder has powers of sale or mortgage scarcely more restricted than those of a tenant in fee-simple. At the same time the possible hardships, as regards the cultivator, of this absolute right of property vested in the owner have been anticipated by the recognition of occupancy rights or fixity of tenure, under certain conditions. Legal rights are everywhere taking the place of unwritten customs. Land, which was before merely a source of livelihood to the cultivator and of revenue to the state, has now become the subject of commercial speculation. The fixing of the revenue demand has conferred upon the owner a credit which he never before possessed, by allowing him a certain share of the unearned increment. This credit he may use improvidently, but none the less has the land system of India been raised from a lower to a higher stage of civilization.
The means by which the land revenue is assessed is known as settlement, and the assessor is styled a settlement officer. In Bengal the assessment has been accomplished once and for all, but throughout the greater part of the rest of India the process is continually going on. The details vary in the different provinces; but, broadly speaking, a settlement may be described as the ascertainment of the agricultural capacity of the land. Prior to the settlement is the work of survey, which first determines the area of every village and frequently of every field also. Then comes the settlement officer, whose duty it is to estimate the character of the soil, the kind of crop, the opportunities for irrigation, the means of communication and their probable development in the future, and all other circumstances which tend to affect the value of the produce. With these facts before him, he proceeds to assess the government demand upon the land according to certain general principles, which may vary in the several provinces. The final result is a settlement report, which records, as in a Domesday Book, the entire mass of agricultural statistics concerning the district.
Lower Bengal and a few adjoining districts of the United Provinces and of Madras have a permanent settlement, i.e. the land revenue has been fixed in perpetuity. When the Company obtained the diwání or financial administration of Bengal in 1765, the theory of a settlement, as described above, was unknown. The existing Mahommedan system was adopted in its entirety. Engagements, sometimes yearly, sometimes for a term of years, were entered into with the zamindars to pay a lump sum for the area over which they exercised control. If the offer of the zamindar was not deemed satisfactory, another contractor was substituted in his place. But no steps were taken, and perhaps no steps were possible, to ascertain in detail the amount which the country could afford to pay. For more than twenty years these temporary engagements continued, and received the sanction of Warren Hastings, the first titular governor-general of India. Hastings’ great rival, Francis, was among those who urged the superior advantages of a permanent assessment. At last, in 1789, a more accurate investigation into the agricultural resources of Bengal was commenced, and the settlement based upon this investigation was declared perpetual by Lord Cornwallis in 1793. The zamindars of that time were raised to the status of landlords, with rights of transfer and inheritance, subject always to the payment in perpetuity of a rent-charge. In default of due payment, their lands were liable to be sold to the highest bidder. The aggregate assessment was fixed at sikká Rs.26,800,989, equivalent to Co.’s Rs.28,587,722, or say 2¾ millions sterling. While the claim of Government against the zamindars was thus fixed for ever, it was intended that the rights of the zamindars over their own tenants should be equally restricted. But no detailed record of tenant-right was inserted in the settlement papers, and, as a matter of fact, the cultivators lost rather than gained in security of tenure. The same English prejudice which made a landlord of the zamindar could recognize nothing but a tenant-at-will in the ryot. By two stringent regulations of 1799 and 1812 the tenant was practically put at the mercy of a rack-renting landlord. If he failed to pay his rent, however excessive, his property was rendered liable to distraint and his person to imprisonment. At the same time the operation of the revenue sale law had introduced a new race of zamindars, who were bound to their tenants by no traditions of hereditary sympathy, but whose sole object was to make a profit out of their newly purchased property. The rack-rented peasantry found no protection in the law courts until 1859, when an act was passed which restricted the landlord’s powers of enhancement in certain specified cases. Later the Bengal Tenancy Act of 1885, since amended by an act of 1898, created various classes of privileged tenants, including one class known as “settled ryots,” in which the qualifying condition is holding land, not necessarily the same land, for twelve years continuously in one village. Outside the privileged classes of tenants the act gives valuable protection to tenants-at-will. The progress in the acquisition of occupancy rights by tenants may be judged from the fact that, whereas in 1877 it was stated of the Champaran district that the cultivator had hardly acquired any permanent interest in the soil, the settlement officer in 1900 reported that 87% of the occupied area was in the possession of tenants with occupancy rights or holding at fixed rates. It is believed that the ryots will eventually be able to secure, and to hold against all comers, the strong legal position which the Bengal Tenancy Act has given them.
The permanent settlement was confined to the three provinces of Bengal, Behar and Orissa, according to their boundaries at that time. Orissa proper, which was conquered from the Mahrattas in 1803, is subject to a temporary settlement, which expired in 1897 and a re-settlement was made in 1900. The enhancement in the revenue amounted to 52% of the previous demand; but in estates in which the increase was specially large it was decided to introduce the new rates gradually.
The prevailing system throughout the Madras presidency is the ryotwari, which takes the cultivator or peasant proprietor as its rent-paying unit, somewhat as the Bengal system takes the zamindar. This system cannot be called The Ryotwari system. indigenous to the country, any more than the zamindari of Bengal. If any system deserves that name, it is that of village assessment, which still lingers in the memories of the people in the south. When the British declared themselves heir to the nawab of the Carnatic at the opening of the 19th century, they had no adequate experience of revenue management. The authorities in England favoured the zamindari system already at work in Bengal, which appeared at least calculated to secure punctual payment. The Madras Government was accordingly instructed to enter into permanent engagements with zamindars, and, where no zamindars could be found, to create substitutes out of enterprising contractors. The attempt resulted in failure in every case, except where the zamindars happened to be the representatives of ancient lines of powerful chiefs. Several of such chiefs exist in the extreme south and in the north of the presidency. Their estates have been guaranteed to them on payment of a peshkash or permanent tribute, and are saved by the custom of primogeniture from the usual fate of subdivision. Throughout the rest of Madras there are no zamindars either in name or fact. The influence of Sir Thomas Munro afterwards led to the adoption of the ryotwari system, which will always be associated with his name. According to this system, an assessment is made with the cultivating proprietor upon the land taken up for cultivation year by year. Neither zamindar nor village officer intervenes between the cultivator and the state, which takes directly upon its own shoulders all a landlord’s responsibility. The early ryotwari settlements in Madras were based upon insufficient experience. They were preceded by no survey, but adopted the crude estimates of native officials. Since 1858 a department of revenue survey has been organized, and the old assessments have been everywhere revised.
Nothing can be more complete in theory and more difficult of exposition than a Madras ryotwari settlement. First, the entire area of the district, whether cultivated or uncultivated, and of each field within the district is accurately measured. The next step is to calculate the estimated produce of each field, having regard to every kind of both natural and artificial advantage. Lastly, a rate is fixed upon every field, which may be regarded as roughly equal to one-third of the gross and one-half of the net produce. The elaborate nature of these inquiries and calculations may be inferred from the fact that as many as thirty-five different rates are sometimes struck for a single district, ranging from 6d. to £1, 4s. per acre. The rates thus ascertained are fixed for a term of thirty years; but during that period the aggregate rent-roll of a district is liable to be affected by several considerations. New land may be taken up for cultivation, or old land may be abandoned; and occasional remissions are permitted under no less than eighteen specified heads. Such matters are discussed and decided by the collector at the jamabandi or court held every year for definitely ascertaining the amount of revenue to be paid by each ryot for the current season. This annual inquiry has sometimes been mistaken by careless passers-by for an annual reassessment of each ryot’s holding. It is not, however, a change in the rates for the land which he already holds, but an inquiry into and record of the changes in his former holding or of any new land which he may wish to take up.
In the early days of British rule no system whatever prevailed throughout the Bombay presidency; and even at the present time there are tracts where something of the old confusion survives. The modern “survey tenure,” as it is called, dates from 1838, when it was first introduced into one of the tálukas of Poona district, and it has since been gradually extended over the greater part of the presidency. As its name implies, the settlement is preceded by survey. Each field is measured, and an assessment placed upon it according to the quality of the soil without any attempt to fix the actual average produce. This assessment holds good, without any possibility of modification, for a term of thirty years. The Famine Commission of 1901 suggested the following measures with a view to improving the position of the Bombay ryot: (1) A tenancy law to protect expropriated ryots, (2) a bankruptcy law, (3) the limitation of the right of transfer, in the interests of ryots who are still in possession of their land.
In the other provinces variations of the zamindari and ryotwari systems are found. In the United Provinces and the Punjab the ascertainment of the actual rents paid is the necessary preliminary to the land revenue demand. The other Provinces. In the Central Provinces, where the landlords (malguzars) derive their title from the revenue settlements made under British rule, the rents are actually fixed by the settlement officer for varying periods. In addition nearly every province has its own laws regulating the subject of tenancy; the tenancy laws of the United Provinces and of the Central Provinces were revised and amended during the decade 1891-1901.