[ 3 ] 



far as in tliem lies, to endeavour to lead others to the 

 same hope and belief. 



Most certainly the question, are we making the 

 most out of the land, must be answered in the nega- 

 tive; but this, not through any imperfection in the 

 existing revenue administration, but because the land 

 itself yields nothing like what it should. 



It is undeniable that in the tenures we have created, 

 and the systems we have adopted, there have been 

 grave errors. Take, for instance, the Permanent 

 Settlement of Bengal. Here, as elsewhere in India, 

 the ruling power was the sole proprietor of the land. 

 Other people enjoyed various classes of occupancy 

 rights, and could not, according to custom, be de- 

 prived of these (though they often were so by our 

 predecessors) so long as they continued to pay the 

 demand of the ruling power, which again, though in 

 practice often only limited by rebellion, ought to have 

 been, according to tradition, one-sixth of the gross 

 produce, or again, which according to custom is the 

 same thing, one-half of what the actual cultivator paid 

 the middleman who made the collections. No doubt 

 over vast tracts the produce was nominally equally 

 divided between cultivator and middleman (adh-huttai 

 as this division is called), but as a matter of fact, 

 owing to the frauds of the cultivators, we may say 

 broadly, that these never did over any large area, for 

 any prolonged period, yield more than one- third of 

 the gross produce to the State collectors, middlemen, 

 zemindars, &c. who, in various parts of the empire, at 

 various periods, have been the primary recipients of 

 the dues of the soil. 



1 * 



