136 Macaulay's Minute on Indigo Planting. 



question appears to be a question between the planter 

 and the zemindar. It is not easy to see how it can 

 be of any consequence to the ryot, which of the two 

 may distrain on his crop. I have no reason to believe 

 that the zemindars exercise their power with more 

 justice or humanity than the planters. The zemindar 

 has great reason to complain of the existing regula- 

 tion. It transfers to others that undoubted right of 

 distress which he formerly possessed. Two other 

 people, by an agreement between themselves to which 

 he is no party, are allowed to deprive him of what 

 was his due, and in return the law gives him a remedy 

 which is certainly less expeditious and simple than 

 that which he anciently had. Exactly the same ex- 

 tent to which this regulation is a benefit to the indigo 

 planter, it must be considered as robbery of the zemin- 

 dar. The misfortune is, that when once Government 

 falls into such an error, there is great difficulty in 

 returning to the right path. In the very act of des- 

 troying old rights, we create new rights, which must be 

 destroyed in their turn if we revert to the old order of 

 things. The zemindar had great reason to complain 

 when his lien was transferred to the planter. The 

 planter, who has invested his capital in the indigo busi- 

 ness on the faith of the regulations of 1823, would 

 have some reason to complain if that lien were now 

 taken from him and given back to the zemindar. 



