Page:Transactions of the Second International Folk-Congress.djvu/348

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
310
Institution and Custom Section.

The division of the threshed grain amongst the various people entitled to a share in an Indian village or hamlet—I use the word "hamlet" to mark the fact that the cultivated lands may be held in full severalty by families of which the members may or may not hold jointly amongst themselves—lies, I think, at the root of any correct theory of the origin and character of Indian political and proprietary institutions. I will take a description of that division from Mr. Fryer's Settlement Report of the Dera Ghazi Khan district of the Punjab, a district in which I served for eighteen months a good many years ago. First of all a varying share of the grain, usually in that part of the country one-fourth, is set apart as mahsul, a word that means the thing collected by authority, the equivalent of the state-rent or land-tax. Another name for the same thing is the hakimi hissa, the share of the hakim or governor. Whoever takes this share is responsible for the payment of the state-rent or land-tax, known in India as the revenue—unless, indeed, he is himself the ruler, or the ruler has by grant excused him from the whole or part of the demand. If a part only is excused, he is responsible for the residue. Out of the remainder of the grain-heap a small portion, usually a sixteenth or seventeenth, is a proprietary due, and is taken by the proprietor, who may or may not be also the actual cultivator. Various small shares are then set apart for the tumandar, or tribal chief, who may also take the mahsul, for the remuneration of village servants— the weighman, potter, blacksmith, winnower, shoemaker, watchman, and so forth—or for charity, as for some local shrine or theoretically holy beggar or village priest. What then remains goes to the cultivator. If the proprietor is also the cultivator, he gets the cultivator's share.

In the comparison of Indian and feudal institutions it is important to follow carefully the disposal of the hakimi hissa or ruler's share. In the old days commonly, under our own administration almost invariably, the share is commuted for a money payment. The share, or the money that represents it, may be variously assigned; it may be divided, part going to one person, part to another ; it may be farmed out for a stated sum, or for a percentage on the collections; or may even be sold by auction to the highest bidder. These, I must add, are not our expedients; they were the expedients of our predecessors. The shares of the