807 



up the several stages of the discussion as follows : *' "With 

 the aspect of the day, the aspect in which the assessment of 

 land revenue is regarded has changed. ' Increased security of 

 fixed property ^ has given way to the ^ just rights of the State* 



* Freedom from the interference of the fiscal officers of Govern- 

 ment ' is now thought of little account, when compared with 



* a sacrifice of any portion of that rental of the land to which the 

 State is entitled.^ The fiscal side of the question is the one 

 chiefly regarded in these days of peace and apparent security." 

 Since Sir Auckland Colvin wrote, the views of the Government 

 of India have once more, owing to the famine of 1876-78 and 

 the distress suffered by the agricultural classes during that 

 catastrophe and the fall in the prices of produce notwithstand- 

 ing the fall in the value of silver, veered round, not indeed to 

 the position occupied in 1862, but to a point midway between 

 it and that of 1871 when the theory of "unearned increment" 

 was in the ascendant and had taken possession of the public 

 mind. The orders at present in force, regulating the proce- 

 dure to be adopted in revising land settlements, which will be 

 described at length later on, are based on an attempt to 

 reconcile the claims of the State to share in the unearned 

 increment in the value of property accruing from natural 

 causes with the necessity for seeing that the interference 

 with, and consequent depreciation of, landed property, which 

 the ascertainment of the Government .share must entail, is 

 not carried to such an extent as to discourage the investment 

 of capital in efiecting improvements to land. 



76. The question of the permanent settlement of the land 

 tax on ryotwar holdings is one in regard to 

 J:!:r:£J:::j''' which the arguments pro and con may be 

 said to be nearly equally balanced. The 

 arguments in its favour may be thus succinctly stated. The 

 first is, that the theory of " unearned increment " in the value 

 of land and of the advantage of making it available for meet- 

 ing public expenditure, with a view to avoid the imposition of 

 taxation properly so called, can have but a limited application 

 in this country. The " true rent*" of land, that is the rent 

 due to the inherent qualities of soil and advantages of situa- 

 tion, as contradistinguished from value imparted to it by the 

 application of capital or labour, is extremely difficult to discover 

 and is subject to constant fluctuations. There is no certain 

 measure of the fertility of lands, as the rent of the same land 

 varies according to the crops grown and the systems of 

 cultivation practised. There is further great difficulty in 

 deciding what is "normal cultivation," "normal harvests" 

 and " normal prices.*' As Professor Marshall has pointed outj 



