[11] THE FISHERIES OF INDIA. 393 



JVC districts possessed the right to sell fish, while they, as a rule, per- 

 mitted the people, on payment, to capture sufficient for their own house- 

 holds. In was, in fact, a license on payment, resumable at will. Ee- 

 mains of this custom still exist in Lahore, while the leasing of fisheries 

 is even now in force in many portions of the Indian Empire. Along the 

 Himalaj^as, in the Kangra and other districts, the petty rajahs adopted 

 a different method. To some persons they gave licenses to supply the 

 flshmarkets, of which they virtually made them monopolists, while 

 others obtained licenses for fishing with small nets for home consump- , 

 tion, but not for sale. In Burma, under native rule, a similar plan was 

 carried out. There were no free fisheries, but inhabitants had the 

 ])rivilege, or perhaps right, to fish for home consumption on the pay- 

 ment of a fixed annual sum to the contractor for the district in which 

 they reside. It is believed that under native rule the erection of fish- 

 ing weirs was iDcrmitted in several of the streams in the Himalayas, but 

 not to the extent that it is at the present day. In some districts land- 

 owners even now raise an income from the fisheries, claiming a third 

 of the captures or a certain amount of money. Some of our officials 

 consider that as the Government has permitted iodiscriminate fishing, 

 the exercise of long practice has converted such into a communal right. 

 Fklihui under British rule. — As British rule has gradually superseded 

 that of the native princes, so the modes in which fisheries were leased 

 have become widely different, and in permanently settled estates, unless 

 a stipulation to the contrary exists, they go with the land. In some 

 localities it has been decided that the adjacent villagers or people pos- 

 sess certain communal rights with respect to them, due, it seems most 

 hkely, to a misapprehension. Although it has been proved that the 

 landowner never received more than one-third of the produce, this does 

 not demonstrate that the other two-thirds were public property, but 

 that such expressed the share accruing to the fisherman in return for 

 his labor in capturing the fish. It is the rule in India and Burma to 

 remunerate by the proceeds. Sometimes the working fisherman has to 

 dispose of his share to the contractor or lessee at a given rate; more 

 rarely the fish are sold, and he receives a proportion of the returns, or 

 he may be paid in kind. In some localities the British Governrnent has 

 leased fisheries, or imposed a tax on the implements of fishing, or a cap- 

 itation tax upon the fishermen, but without interfering with the manner 

 in which the fisheries were conducted. By degrees the tax on fishing 

 implements was taken off, but the fishermen still became poorer, and in 

 1849, at least in Madras, many leased fisheries were thrown open to the 

 public, resulting, as they were not regulated, in unliminated license, 

 and thus an intended boon resulted in their depoj)ulation. In Burma, 

 the practice of employing fixed engines in irrigated fields and water- 

 courses very largely increased when the native regime became abol- 

 ished, as did also the custom of throwing weirs across creeks and minor 

 streaais. 



