ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF FORESTS IN INDIA. 11 L 



in view arc to be attained. Forests, like all other landed property, 

 ran be either in the hands of the State, of towns, village-communities, 

 or other public bodies or corporations ; or, lastly, in the hands of 

 private individuals. There are thus two ways of accomplishing our 

 object. Either the State must, by legislation, subject all forest 

 property to a certain control for the public benefit, reserving to 

 itself the right of compelling the proprietor to manage it in accord- 

 ance with certain rules and prescriptions laid down from time to 

 time, as circumstances may require. In many European countries 

 this plan has been more or less successfully pursued, and in most is 

 still maintained with regard to forest land which is the property of 

 municipalities, villages, and public corporations. In France, for 

 instance, the management of all these classes of forests is under the 

 control of the State Forest Department ; and, upon the whole, the 

 system works well. Similar arrangements exist in Prussia and in 

 other German countries. Private forest property, however, is prac- 

 tically free in most European countries. Nearly all European States 

 hold large forest domains in the hands of Government, and this 

 makes it possible to maintain an efficient body of public forest 

 officers, with practical experience, competent to manage or to control 

 the forests of other proprietors. 



Italy has, it is true, of late years pursued a different policy, but 

 its success is doubtful. The greater portion of the State forests 

 and of the ecclesiastical estates, which might have been formed into 

 State forests, have been sold; and the project of a law, placing 

 such tracts of private and other woodlands, as may from time to 

 time appear necessary, under the control of the State forest officers, 

 has repeatedly been discussed, but as yet without any practical 

 result. 



In India, everything tends to show that the State must endeavour 

 to retain as many of the more important forest tracts as possible in 

 its own hands. In the first instance, this seems the only way of 

 forming an efficient body of forest officers with practical experience. 

 In the second instance, the control of forests in the hands of other 

 proprietors will, in India, always be a peculiarly difficult matter. 

 Not that the formation of village forests, and their regular manage- 

 ment under the control of State forest officers, would not be a most 

 desirable object to aim at. Certainly, the advantages of well- 

 managed communal forests are great. The public property thus 

 created cannot readily be converted into cash, and wasted by an 

 improvident generation. It yields a fixed and certain annual 



