National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1875-10-22

Claims OF the peasantry to be educated
"and to be represented, to be freed from
"the trammels of ignorance and saved
I" from the oppression of zemindars-such
"ideas have invariably emanated from
"our rulers and not from us. While
Legislation has been busy for the best
part of century in restricting the
"powers Of the zemindars, the large land.
"hOlders, our press sees no such necessity.
while legislation for the past several years
has been planning mass education, we
"haye been calculating the probable loss
"tbat such measure would entail on
"high education. And yet high eiuca-
"tion concerns hardly one man in thou
"sand, and all that has been written or
spoken in its favor, all that has fired the
patriotism of our countrymen and has
filled the columns Of our newspapers, was
for the interest and benefit of one man in a
thousand, the claims of the remaining nine
"hundred and ninety nine being ignored or
forgotten. All honor to the legislation
(Which has disregarded such public opinion
"and has toiled for the million as well as the
"upper ten-thousand. 1t is an unfortunate
fact-and we write this in shame and
"sorrow-that the welfare of the country
sis identified by our educated country
"men with The interests of the zemindars.
Patriotism is another name for the advo-
"cacy of zemindars' rights and interests,
"and word spoken in favor of the claims
"of the cultivators is regarded and
branded as certain sign of denational.
citation"
Under the Mohammedan regime the
zemindars were not proprietors of the land,
but rather public officers who collected
from the village communities, by whom the
land was occupied and cultivated, the rents
claimed by the Government They had,
indeed, sort of hereditary right to the
Offices they held, but could be deposed with
out ceremony when they incurred the dis
pleasure of the Subadar or governor of the
province. To the duties of rent-collectors
they added the powers of magistrates, and
in spite of certain checks, the efficiency of
which depended very much upon the char
acter of the ruler for the time being, the
rYots were subjected to the most grinding
oppression.
In 1772, when the English assumed the
direct administration Of the country, they
sought to improve the position of the ryots
by depriving the zemindars of their magis.
terial functions, but their own ignorance of
the language and customs of the country
and the character Of the people defeated
their efforts at reform, and for a time made
things even worse than they had been.
The stranger magistrates, unacquainted
with Indian methods of ascertaining the
truth, were utterly unable to foil the bribery
and perjury by which they were sur
rounded, and the country was almost given
over to gangs Of robbers known by the
name :'dacoits, whose depredations were
even more inimical than the exactions of
the zemindars to the interests of peaceful
industry. Gas regards the early effor. of
" the police" says Mr.. Dutt, 'their extor-
4" ton and fearful oppression are but too
/" well known, and it is not, perhaps, an
" exaggeration to say that in those days a
" dacoity was less feared on its own account
Il" than on account of the police investiga-
q" ton that was to follow. Old men in the
" present day remember the time when
" shops were closed, treasures were buried,
" cattle driven into jungles and villages de-
" serted when police investigation was
" anticipated"
1t was to remedy. this.state OF things that
Lord CORVALLIS, familiar with the English
idea of q territorial aristocracy, conceived
the planof giving to the zemindars pro-
prietary rights in the soil, and trusting to
their honor to treat the ryots fairly. To
sketch the results Of this scheme would &C.
cupy too much space. Suffice 1t to say that
the ryot found in it only new and more
systematic form of oppression for now
there was no barrier to the exactlons of the
zemindar, save his own will and the limit
of the ryot's ability to pay.
Since then various reforms have been
attempted, and the attempts have been at
tended with a certain degree of success.
The most potent measure adopted was
probably Lord Canning's land reform act
of 1859, which may be regarded as to some
extent the model for Mr.. Gladstone's Irish
land act of 1870. Its object was to give
the cultiyating classes a more secure tenure
of their land. 1t divided the ryots into
three classes. Those who had occupied
their plot Of ground in unbroken descent
from the time of the permanent settlement
(the measure of CORVALLIS above referred
to- were granted fixity of tenure and ex-
emption from enhancement of rent Tlose
who had held land for twelve years or
more were also granted fxity of tenure,
and it was enacted that their rents could
not be raised except on certain fair and
equitable grounds. But the third class,
by far the most numerous, we're
left at the mercy of the zemindars as be-
fore. Mr.. Dutt suggests that the rights
which have been bestowed on the first
class of ryots should be extended to all,
so that no ryot should be subject to con-
viction at the will of the zemindar. In
this way he thinks it possible that an indie
pendent peasantryImight yet be raised up,
suuuClSuly SnliSntSnCu auu splIlIeu W
avail themselves of the protection of
English justice against bondage to which
they have for centuries been slaves
1t may be remarked here that in the
provinces more recently annexed the
British authorities have acted upon more
Intimate acquaintance with the principles
Of Indian lav-tenure, under which the
people of each village had common right
IN the lands attached thereto, and had no
landlord but the State. In several of the
provinces under British authority this
system has been maintained, and as the
is very moderate in its ex-
actions, the peasants are enjoying a far
higher degree of prosperity than is enjoyed
by the same class in Bengal and other
provinces into which a system less in har-
mony with the genius, traditions and hab-
It's of the people has been introduced.