1 Ocr., 1902.] QUEENSLAND AGRICULTURAL JOURNAL. 275 
difficulties of transport, and other causes not excepting political influence, which had 
to be faced and conquered by the men who in less than fifty years laid the foundations 
and erected the superstructure of the system of Indian forestry, which has elicited the 
admiration of the world. Dr. Schlich, writing in 1889, and pointing out that the 
average annual net revenue of the period comprised between the years 1864 to 1867 
was £106,615, and the average net annual revenue for the period comprised between 
the years 1882 to 1887 was £384,752, goes on to say:—‘‘The annual net revenue 
during the period 1882-1887 was four times that of the period 1864-67, and the 
increase is going on with undiminished rapidity. There is little doubt, if any, that 
twenty-five years hence the net surplus will be four times the present amount if the 
Government of India perseveres in its forest policy as developed in the past. Indeed, 
it would not be going too far to say that the increasing forest revenue bids fair to 
ecome a substantial set-off against the expected loss of the opium revenue—a loss 
which may occur some day. ‘This is the legacy left to the Treasury of the Indian 
Empire by the men who dmectad its forest policy during the last twenty-five years.” 
A reference to the report of the Inspector-General of Forests for British India, 
1899-1900, shows that this prophesy of Dr. Schlich is in a fair way of being realised 
thus :—1886-7, gross revenue 10,678,807 rupees, expenditure 6,831,284 rupees, propor- 
tion of expenditure to gross revenue 64 per cent.; 1899-1900, gross revenue 
19,009,610 rupees, expenditure 11,024,680 rupees, proportion of expenditure to gross 
revenue 58 per cent., an increase of 8,330,803 rupees in gross revenue and a decrease 
of 6 per cent. on the expenditure as compared with the revenue. The net profit on 
the Indian forests in 1899-1900 was £532,329, as against £191,484 in, 1875-6, twenty- 
five years previously. 
In 1894, the Government of India formulated a resolution for the guidance of the 
Forestry Department, and the information of the public. This document is a 
declaration of the forest policy of the Indian Government, and deserves the closest 
study by every Australian legislator who takes an interest in this important question. 
The following eatracts are of general interest :— 
“The sole object with which the State forests are administered is the public 
benefit. In some cases the public to be benefited are the whole body of taxpayers, in 
others the people of the tract within which the forest is situated; but in almost all 
cases the constitution and preservation of a forest involve, in greater or less degree, 
the regulation of rights al the restriction of privileges of user in the forest area, 
which may have previously been enjoyed by the inhabitants of its immediate 
neighbourhood. ‘This regulation and restriction are justified only when the advantage 
to be gained by the public is great, and the cardinal principle to be observed is that 
the rights and privileges of individuals must be limited, otherwise than for their own 
benefit, only in such degree as is absolutely necessary to secure that advantage.” 
‘his declaration of general policy seems cast on broad and liberal views. The 
resolution continues :— 
“The forests of India, being State property, may be broadly classed under the 
following heads :— 
(a) Forests the preservation of which is essential on climatic or physical 
grounds. 
(b) Forests which afford a supply of valuable timbers for commercial purposes. 
(c) Minor forests. ; 
(d) Pasture lands.” 
* % * * * # 
“The first class of forests are generally situate on hill slopes, where the 
preservation of such vegetation as exists, or the encouragement of further growth is 
essential to the protection from the devastating action of hill torrents of the cultivated 
places that lie below them. 
“Here the interests to be protected are important beyond all comparison with 
the interests which it may be necessary to restrict, and so long as there is reasonable 
hope of the restriction being effectual, the lesser interests must not be allowed to 
stand in the way.” 
“Tt should also be remembered that subject to certain conditions, to be referred 
to presently, the claims of cultivation are stronger than the claims of forest preservation. 
The pressure of the population upon the soil is one of the greatest difficulties that India 
has to face, and that application of the soil must generally be preferred which will 
support the largest numbers in proportion to the area. Accordingly, whenever a 
demand for culturable land exists, and can only be supplied from forest areas, the 
