228 



unauthorizedly imposed might be perpetuated, the imposition 

 of any further cesses subsequently would be prevented and 

 that the adoption of the rates levied in the year previous to 

 the year of the permanent settlement, would in most cases 

 obviate the necessity for enquiry into difl&cult questions of 

 vague and undefined usage as regards rates of rent. On the 

 other hand, the poivers conferred on the Zemindars for the 

 recovery of their rents were the following : first, they were 

 authorized to distrain for rent the moveable property of the 

 ryots, with the exception of lands, houses, articles of trade 

 or manufacture, and also ploughs, implements of husbandry, 

 ploughing cattle or seed grain so long as other property 

 might be forthcoming (sections 2, 3 and 4 of Regulation 28 

 of 1802) ; secondly, they had power to eject from their lands 

 the ryots who refused to accept the puttahs^ offered to them 

 in the presence of witnesses, and to grant the lands to other 

 persons (section 10 of Regulation 30 of 1802) ; thirdly, where 

 a person who made default in the payment of rent had by grant 

 or established usage of the country a transferable right in 

 the land, the Zemindar might apply to the Court to sell such 

 right in satisfaction of the rent due ; and where the defaulter 

 was a lease-holder or other tenant having a right of occupancy 

 only so long as he paid the rent, without right of property or 

 possession, the Zemindar could eject him of his own autho- 

 rity (Regulation 28 of 180:^, section 34, clause 7) ; fourthly, 

 Zemindars were empowered to summon, and, if necessary, 

 compel the attendance of ryots for the adjustment of their 

 rents, or for measuring lands, or for "any other lawful pur- 

 pose." These powers were exerciseable without any previous 

 application to the Courts, but for abuse of these powers the 

 Zemindars were liable to fine and damages (section 34, clause 

 8 of Regulation 28 of 1802). Zemindars were prohibited from 

 confining or inflicting corporal punishment on ryots on pain 

 of prosecution in a Criminal Court (section 29 of Regulation 

 28 of 1802). 



Mr. Webbe, the Chief Secretary to the Madras Govern- 

 ment in 1802, was appointed Special Commissioner for carry- 

 ing out the permanent settlement in this Presidency, and 

 the duty of drafting the regulations passed in connection with 

 the settlement devolved on him. In a communication made 

 to Mr. Webbe by Messrs. Hodgson and Greenway, the latter 

 gentlemen strongly urged the desirability of inserting in 

 Regulation 30 of 1802 certain provisions which would have 

 had the effect of placing the rights of ryots on. a .secure 

 basis. The section suggested was to the following effect : 

 ^'No Zemindar, proprietor (or whatever name be' given to these 



