BOOK

II.

Village land

holders.

The popular notion is that the village landholders are all descended from one or more individuals who first settled the village; and that the only exceptions are formed by persons who have derived their rights by purchase, or otherwise, from members of the original stock. The supposition is confirmed by the fact that, to this day, there are often only single families of landholders in small villages, and not many in large ones (G); but each has branched out into so many members, that it is not uncommon for the whole agricultural labour to be done by the landholders, without the aid either of tenants or labourers.

The rights of the landholders are theirs collectively; and, though they almost always have a more or less perfect partition of them, they never have an entire separation. A landholder, for instance, can sell or mortgage his rights; but he must first have the consent of the village, and the purchaser steps exactly into his place and takes up all his obligations. If a family becomes extinct, its share returns to the common stock.

Their rights are various in different parts of the country. Where their tenure is most perfect, they hold their lands subject to the payment of a fixed proportion of the produce to government, or free of all demand. When at the lowest, they retain some honorary exemptions that distinguish them from the rest of the villagers. (H)

There are many instances where the government has taken advantage of the attachment of the

landholders to their land to lay on them heavier imposts than other cultivators are willing to pay. Even then, however, some advantage, actual or prospective, must still remain; since there is no tract in which village landholders are found in which their rights are not occasionally sold and mortgaged. One advantage, indeed, they always enjoy in the consideration shown towards them in the country, which would induce a family to connect itself by marriage with a landholder who laboured with his own hands, rather than with a wealthy person, equally unexceptionable in point of cast, but of an inferior class of society.

So rooted is the notion of property in the village landholders, that, even when one of them is compelled to abandon his fields from the demand of government exceeding what they will pay, he is still considered as proprietor, his name still remains on the village register, and, for three generations, or one hundred years, he is entitled to reclaim his land, if from any change of circumstances he should be so disposed.

In the Támil country and in Hindostan, a tenant put in by the government will sometimes voluntarily pay the proprietor's fee to the defaulting and dispossessed landholder.*

CHAP.

II.

In all villages there are two descriptions of Permanent tenants, who rent the lands of the village land- tenants. holders (where there are such), and those of the

* Mr. Ellis, Report of Select Committee, 1832, vol. iii. p. 376.; Mr. Fortescue, Selections, vol. iii. p. 405.

II.

BOOK government, where there is no such intermediate class. These tenants are commonly called ryots (I), and are divided into two classes, - permanent and temporary.

The permanent ryots are those who cultivate the lands of the village where they reside, retain them during their lives, and transmit them to their children. (K)

They have often been confounded with the village landholders, though the distinction is marked in all cases where any proprietor's fee exists. In it no tenant ever participates.

*

Many are of opinion that they are the real proprietors of the soil; while others regard them as mere tenants at will. All, however, are agreed within certain limits; all acknowledging, on the one hand, that they have some claim to occupancy, and on the other, that they have no right to sell their land.

But, though all admit the right of occupancy, some contend that it is rendered nugatory by the right of the landlord to raise his rent; and others assert that the rent is so far fixed, that it ought never to go beyond the rate customary in the surrounding district.

The truth probably is, that the tenant's title was clear as long as the demand of the state was fixed; but that it became vague and of no value when the public assessment became arbitrary. At present,

* Mr. Ellis, Report of Select Committee of House of Commons, 1832, vol. iii. p. 385.

the permanent tenant is protected by the interest of the landlord; he will pay more than a stranger for lands long held by his family, and situated in a village where he has a house; but if driven to extremities, he could easily get a temporary lease, in another village, on lighter terms. (L)

It is thought by some that the permanent tenants are the remains of village landholders reduced by oppression; others think they are temporary tenants who have gained their rights by long possession. It is probable that both conjectures are partially right; as well as a third, that their tenure was, in many instances, conferred on them by the landholders at the first settlement of the township.

CHAP.

II.

tenants.

The temporary tenant (M) cultivates the lands Temporary of a village different from that to which he belongs, holding them by an annual lease, written or understood. The first description of land being occupied by the resident tenant, an inferior class falls to his share, for which there is little competition; for this reason, and on account of his other disadvantages, he gets his land at a lower rent than the permanent tenant.

There is another sort of tenant who deserves to be mentioned, though of much less importance than either of the other two. (N) These are persons whose cast or condition in life prevents their engaging in manual labour, or their women from taking part in any employment that requires their

BOOK appearing before men.

II.

Hired labourers.

Shopkeepers, &c.

Probable origin and

communi

ties.

In consideration of these disadvantages, they are allowed to hold land at a favourable rate, so as to admit of their availing themselves of their skill or capital by the help of hired labourers. (O)

The services and remuneration of hired labourers are naturally various; but they differ too little from those of other countries to require explanation.

It need scarcely be repeated that each of these classes is not necessarily found in every village. One village may be cultivated entirely by any one of them, or by all, in every variety of proportion. Shopkeepers, &c. are subject to a ground-rent, and sometimes a tax besides, to the person on whose land they reside. They are under the general authority of the headman as a magistrate, but have little else to do with the community.

It seems highly probable that the first villages decline of founded by Hindús were all in the hands of village the village communities. communities. In the early stage of their progress, it was impossible for single men to cut fields out of the forest, and to defend them against the attacks of the aborigines, or even of wild beasts; there was no capital to procure the services of others; and, unless the undertaker had a numerous body of kindred, he was obliged to call in associates who were to share in the profits of the settlement; and thence came the formation of village communities, and the division of the land into townships.

The unoccupied waste, as in all other cases where society has assumed a regular form, must