and Magazine of the Ceylon Agricultural Society, 



271 



tions are made in the order {b), (c), (a) and the 

 balance, if any, distributed by the rule. It 

 must be remembered that this distribution is 

 not the same for all fields, or for all 

 parts of the country. The systems of 

 distribution are many, but they are all 

 on the same plan ; the one above described 

 is for a field yielding 10-fold : a common clasB 

 of fields. Richer fields yield a larger, and less 

 fertile fields a lower rent, the balance being 

 divided in different ways. The less fertile the 

 field the better the apparent though not the 

 real wages : this being, of course, to meet extra 

 labour in cultivation and increased risk of lot s 

 It follows that among native cultivators, pur- 

 suing their cultivation in accordance with their 

 own customs, the landowner gets a rent iu kind 

 exactly proportioned to the productive capa- 

 city of his land ; the capitalist gets a certain and 

 liberal interest on his Joan, and a proportionate 

 return, if successful, on that portion of his en- 

 terprise which he has entered on as a specula- 

 tion ; and the labourer a return in proportion 

 to the success of his labours. But does the land- 

 owner thus get a less rent for his land than he 

 would, if he cultivated it with some other pro- 

 duct, that is, is the industry "unremunerative to 

 him ? In Colombo the native paddy-landowner 

 has turned his paddy-land into grass-fields ; 

 outlying corners of fields, unfertile or incapable 

 of irrigation, are in the Western and Southern 

 Provinces sometimes planted with coconuts : 

 very rarely in old days the Kandyan planted 

 coffee in his'disused rice-field : but, on the whole 

 once a paddy-field always a paddy-field is the 

 rule in Ceylon, Even the Jaffna Tamil who 

 grows everything keeps his paddy-field for 

 its accustomed use in its turn. Surely it i s 

 probable — the writer is not a philanthropist 

 and will therefore not venture to dogmatise — 

 that this is so because it is to the owner's 

 interest ; in other words because paddy-land 

 owning is remunerative. For what is the alter- 

 native ? That a very large body of persons, 

 and no inconsiderable number of whom are 

 wealthy, intelligent, and speculative, commonce 

 or continue to grow rice on land which could 

 be more profitably employed otherwise because 

 (ft) it is the custom, or (b) because they are 

 oppressed by unpaid headmen, or (c) because 

 they think the cutivation of rice a more honour- 

 able pursuit than others. These are the only 

 reasons that are ever offered us on the other side, 

 and it is not for a seeker after truth to deny that 

 they may have weight, but do they account for 

 all the facts F A large body of persons — Sinhalese, 



Tamil and Malay — have migrated from Hara- 

 bantota and its neighbourhood to Tihawa to 

 cultivate rice. Was it under the influence of 

 custom, or at the instigation of unpaid headmen, 

 or in the pursuit of reputation, or did they hope 

 to make and — for they are constantly being 

 followed by others — do they make money ? 



Is that wealthy speculator Mr. de Mel seeking 

 the bubble reputation at Muturajawela, or is he 

 terrorised by a village arachchi? 



Under the new Walawe irrigation work in the 

 S.P., not yet working, 1,000 acres of Government 

 land have already been purchased by private 

 buyers : are they seekers of honour, slaves of 

 custom, or victims of the Great Unpaid ? 



Are the rich Moormen who poured their money 

 into the Government coffers in return for irriga- 

 ble land in Batticaloa content with the mere 

 name of landowner, or do they hope for a profit? 



The local philanthropist tells us that they 

 have engaged in the least remunerative of native 

 industries. Have they, and if so why have they, 

 or do they by any chance understand, their own 

 business better than the local philanthropist? 



And, now comes the turn of the capitalist. 

 He need not keep us long ; nobody ever wastes 

 a tear on him. On his advance of seed paddy 

 he gets 50 per cent, interest certain, and he may 

 be trusted to be making a good thing over any 

 other advance he makes. Let us leave him and 

 turn to the labourer. Does the labourer in the 

 rice-field get more or less than a similar amount 

 of work would earn for him in other occupations? 

 No one can certainly tell ; for though it is possible 

 to measure his receipts, no one can measure the 

 amount of his work, for the fact is this, that two 

 or three days of arduous labour at the beginning 

 once over, the rest consists of a hand's turn done 

 at odd times and is by no means incompatible 

 with the contemporaneous pursuit of other 

 industries. 



It is constantly stated in this connection that 

 Sir C. P. Layard, a very high authority, ex- 

 pressed his opinion that labour in the rice- 

 lield was the worst paid of all labour. It is 

 usual for the philanthropist and sometimes for 

 less positive and better informed persons to 

 quote, as nearly as he can remember them, Sir 

 Charles' words and to apply them to both bran- 

 ches of the industry — but this is because he has 

 never had them with their context in the original. 

 The statement is, if the writer — who is far from 

 books of reference— is not mistaken, contained 

 in one of the earliest printed Administration 



