270 



to the people. In a country circumstanced like India f 

 however, there are two parties to a transaction of 

 this kind the Community and the Landholders ; and 

 the part the King i. e. the State, has to perform, is 

 clearly to mediate between these two interests. Now 

 it has been before shown that the land revenue iu 

 India, is simply the return of that portion of the 

 produce of the soil to the King, as the trustee for the 

 Community, which is his rightful property, and not 

 a tax ; and it is essential to the right understand- 

 ing of this question that thU point be kept pro- 

 minently in view. For, if it be set aside, and the 

 question be argued as if the land was the property 

 of individuals, or in other svords, from an English 

 point of view, the error of the premises will inevi- 

 tably appear in the conclusion, and vitiate the 

 result. To make any such attempt, moreover, would 

 be at once to overturn the main principle on which 

 the fiscal system of India has from time immemorial 

 been based and to cut from under the Govern- 

 ment of India, as it were, the solid ground on 

 which it has always justified its right to derive 

 so large a portion of its revenue from the land. 

 Strong in the sense that it was dealing with the 

 property of the State, and not taxing the property 

 of individnals the Government of India, as the 

 necessities of the Community in regard to protection 

 and good Government increased, has always had the 

 power, within fair limits, to increase, concurrently, 



