1111 
 
 fill 
 
 f F 
 
 
 ffIiI) ; E 
 
 r {'> Mi^Ji-1 '^ J ' * ' ' ' i' ' 
 ; v-t <" f / 5 '- . '.' \ v ' 
 
THE 
 
 LAND TAX OF INDIA 
 
 ACCORDING TO THE MOOHUMMUDAN LAW 
 
 WITH AN 
 
 |ntrobittf0rjr 
 
THE 
 
 LAND TAX OF INDIA, 
 
 ACCORDING TO THE MOOHUMMUDAN LAW 
 
 TRANSLATED 
 
 FROM THE FUTAWA ALUMOEEREE, 
 
 Jtotcs. 
 
 SECOND EDITION, 
 
 WITH AN INTRODUCTORY ESSAY 
 
 ON THE LKABING PRINCIPLES OF THE TAX, ITS APPLICATION TO THE 
 BRITISH PROVINCES, AND ITS EFFECT ON THE TENURE OF LAND. 
 
 BY 
 
 NEIL B. E. BAILLIE, 
 
 AUTHOR OF SEVERAL WORKS OX THE MOOHUMMUDAN LAW. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 SMITH, ELDER, & CO., 15 WATERLOO PLACE, 
 
 1873. 
 
PREFACE 
 
 TO THE 
 
 FIRST EDITION. 
 
 THE most important of the rights acquired by the East 
 India Company, by cession or conquest, from its predecessors 
 in the Government of India, is the Khiraj or Land Tax, 
 which has existed in that country from early times, and was 
 probably imposed upon it soon after its conquest by the 
 Mohammedans. In Bengal, the right to this tax was con- 
 ferred on the Company by an express grant from the Mogul 
 Emperor, Shah Alum, under a Firman bearing date the 12th 
 of August, 1765 ; and neither in that Presidency, nor in any 
 other part of India, have the East India Company, or their 
 local governors, ever pretended to any greater rights in 
 respect of this particular tax, than belonged to the preceding 
 governments, under the acknowledged law of the country. 
 It has, therefore, always been considered a matter of import- 
 ance to ascertain as correctly as possible the nature and 
 limits of that tax, according to the Moohummudan Law, 
 which was not only the general law of the country, but was 
 more especially that which determined the rights of the 
 Government and the people to each other. Enquirers on 
 this subject have usually directed their investigations to the 
 opinions prevailing among the people, and the practices of 
 subordinate governors, rather than to the written records of 
 
 .530149 
 
11 PREFACE. 
 
 the law. This may perhaps be accounted for by the fact, 
 that the authorities of the Moohummudan Law are still in 
 a great measure shut up in the Arabic language. The only 
 original authority on the Law of the Khiraj, hitherto acces- 
 sible to the mere English reader, is the rather confused 
 account of it which is contained in Mr. Hamilton's transla- 
 tion of the Hidayah. Unless perused with care, and some 
 previous knowledge of the subject, that account may in some 
 respects mislead the reader, and it is scarcely intelligible 
 without the aid of commentaries on the work, that are still 
 to be found only in the Arabic language. For this reason, 
 in continuing my extracts from the Futawa Alumgeeree, I 
 have selected this part of the law as not only of great im- 
 portance in itself, but also as that which, after Sale, is 
 perhaps involved in the greatest obscurity, and most requires 
 elucidation. 
 
 The following pages contain all that I have been able to 
 find in the six volumes of the Futawa Alumgeeree, having a 
 direct bearing on the Khiraj or Land Tax. Their extent 
 bears no proportion to the amount of labour which has been 
 expended in compiling them, or in acquiring the knowledge 
 necessary to their proper explanation. The explanation is 
 contained partly in an Introduction, and partly in the Notes. 
 In the former I have endeavoured to deduce the leading 
 principles of the Law, and to apply them to the present 
 system of Land Eevenue. The latter have been derived 
 from other parts of the Futawa Alumgeeree, and from the 
 Hidayah and two of its Commentaries, the Kifayah and 
 Inayah. In the Introductory Essay, the Shuraya-ool-Islam, 
 a Treatise on the Sheea doctrines, is also occasionally referred 
 to. 1 All these works, which are in Arabic, have been printed 
 at Calcutta, under the authority of the Committee of Public 
 Instruction. The Hidayah and Kifayah are printed together, 
 and the combined work is referred to under the double or 
 
 1 Omitted in the present Essay. 
 
PREFACE. iii 
 
 single name, as the reference is to both text and comment, 
 or to one or the other of them. When the Hidayah is 
 cited, the Translation by Mr. Hamilton is usually referred to 
 at the same time, the latter as the Hedaya, the word being 
 so spelled in the title of the Translation, while the original 
 is cited as the Hidayah, according to the spelling in the 
 English title-page of the printed edition. For an account 
 of the original compilation of the Futawa Alumgeeree, and 
 the authorities of the Moohummudan Law, I beg leave to 
 refer the reader to the Preliminary Remarks and Introduc- 
 tion to my book on the Moohummudan Law of Sale. 
 
 It is now necessary to say a few words of the contents of 
 this very brief volume. The Khiraj is closely connected in 
 origin with another tax or impost on the produce of land, 
 called the Ooshr or tithe, and they are commonly treated of 
 under one head, by the writers on the Moohummudan Law. 
 The Ooshr, however, is a branch of a more general impost, 
 called the Zukat, which is applicable to charitable purposes. 
 The first chapter of the following selections treats of the 
 Ooshr and Khiraj conjointly. In the second, the Ooshr is 
 considered with reference to its nature as the Zukat on 
 fruits and crops. The third contains some extracts relating 
 to the original imposition of the Ooshr and Khiraj upon 
 different lands. These two imposts are taxes on the pro- 
 ductive energies of the soil ; but some things below its 
 surface are liable to the deduction of a fifth. Accordingly, 
 the fourth chapter treats of the Khooms, or fifth on metals 
 and buried treasures. It is the proprietor of the land who 
 is liable for the Ooshr and Khiraj, and in most cases for the 
 Khooms. The question of proprietorship in the land is thus 
 of great collateral importance. The fifth chapter shows how 
 the proprietorship of waste land is acquired by bringing it 
 into cultivation. But a proprietor is not always in posses- 
 sion of his own land, and the possessor of it may sometimes 
 be confounded with him. The last chapter, therefore, treats 
 
 a2 
 
IV PREFACE. 
 
 of a peculiar contract called Moozaraut, by which the rela- 
 tions of proprietor and possessor, or landlord and tenant as 
 they would be called by us, have been commonly regulated 
 in Mohammedan countries. 
 
 An Appendix is added, containing some documents which 
 are referred to in the Introductory Essay. One of these is 
 worthy of more particular notice. It is a copy of the trans- 
 lation of a Firman, addressed by the Emperor Aurungzebe, 
 apparently by way of circular, to the Dewans of his different 
 provinces ; and is of value, not only as showing the state of 
 the Khiraj, at a time when the Mohammedan power was in 
 its strength, but also as demonstrating that the Digest of the 
 Law, which was prepared by this Emperor's command, was 
 practically carried into effect, in one important department, 
 by his own express authority. This document is considered 
 to be of so much importance in the last point of view, that 
 notes have been added to it, referring to the corresponding 
 parts in the text. 
 
 It is proper to add, that this work, like its predecessor, on 
 the Moohummudan Law of Sale, is published at the expense 
 of the East India Company. This is no pledge for its 
 accuracy, nor any sanction for the opinions expressed in the 
 Introductory Essay. For these, the writer alone is respon- 
 sible. But he hopes that he may refer to this renewed 
 instance of the liberality of the Court of Directors, as an 
 earnest of the value which it continues to attach to exposi- 
 tions of the Moohummudan Law. He takes this opportunity 
 of repeating his acknowledgments to all the members of the 
 Court, and begs leave, as a mark of his respect, to inscribe a 
 work on which their patronage has bestowed some import- 
 ance, to their present enlightened Chairman, Sir JAMES 
 WEIR HOGG, Baronet. 
 
 GLOUCESTER TERRACE, HYDE^PARK, 
 3lst March, 1853. 
 
ADVERTISEMENT 
 
 TO THE 
 
 SECOND EDITION. 
 
 IN the former edition of the Introductory Essay, I adopted 
 the theory of the Bengal Eegulations with respect to the 
 relative rights of the Zemindars and Eyots. A further ex- 
 amination of the authorities led me- to doubt the correctness 
 of that theory ; and my doubts have been confirmed by the 
 light incidentally cast upon the subject by the late Sir Henry 
 Elliott's valuable collection of the Native Historians of India. 
 Much of the Essay that had been adapted to views that I am 
 now satisfied are erroneous has thus become superfluous ; and 
 I have thought that by recasting the whole and omitting 
 everything that was merely speculative, the work might be 
 made practically more useful. What is now presented to the 
 reader is in some respects rather a new essay than a second 
 edition of the old one. It is divided into four parts. The 
 first contains an account of the history and nature of the 
 Khiraj or Mohammedan Land Tax ; the second, its applica- 
 tion to British India, including its effect on the tenure of 
 land ; the third, the changes that have taken place in these 
 tenures since the transfer of the Dewany or Civil Grovern- 
 ment of Bengal, Behar, and Orissa to the East India Com- 
 pany ; and the fourth, the Lakhiraj tenures, or such as are 
 exempt from the Khiraj. 
 
 The following abbreviations are used in the references to 
 authorities : 
 
 Fut. Al. for Futawa Alumgeeree. 
 
 Maverdy for the Uhkam Sultaneeah of that author. 
 
 Ay. Akb. for the Ayeen Akbery. Mr. Glad win's Translation. Q to 
 edition. 
 
 Elliott for the History of India as told by its own Historians, by the 
 late Sir H. Elliott. 
 
 Ap. F. E. for the Appendix to the Fifth Keportfrom the Select Com- 
 mittee on the affairs of the East India Company. 
 
 Digest for Digest of Moohummudan Law. N. B. E. Baillie. 
 
 For mode of referring to the Hidayah see Preface, p. iii. 
 
 By Regulations those of the Government of Bengal are 
 meant where not otherwise specified. 
 
 The references within parentheses in the text are to the 
 body of the work, which is the same as in the first edition. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 OF 
 
 THE INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Ooshr and Khiraj, or Tithe and Tribute ix 
 
 How first imposed on the land of conquered countries .... x 
 
 Eeligion the leading principle xii 
 
 Modified in the case of Mooslims by the quality of the water . . xii 
 
 Distinction between Ooshr-water and Khiraj-w&ter .... xii 
 
 The double Ooshr xv 
 
 Three kinds of land, Ooshree, Khirajee, and Sooluhee . . . . xv 
 
 Mutations of Ooshree, and Sooluhee land xv 
 
 Khirajee land remains unchanged xvi 
 
 Waste land ; how subjected to Ooshr or Khiraj when brought into cul- 
 tivation xvi 
 
 Two kinds of Khiraj, MooJcasumah, and Wuzcefa .... xviii 
 
 Characteristics of each xviii 
 
 Land subject to Wuzecfa is the property of parties by whom it is 
 
 payable xx 
 
 Land subject to MooJcasumah to be considered still the property of 
 
 conquerors xx 
 
 Sovereign entitled to receive the Khiraj xxii 
 
 Remedies for its recovery xxii 
 
 Purposes to which it is applicable xxiii 
 
 Persons on whom it may be expended, called Ahl-i-Khiraj . . . xxiii 
 
 It may be occasionally cut off from the land, and given to such persons . xxiii 
 
 Such cuttings-off called IJctaa xxiv 
 
 IJctaa for longer than life of grantee void xxiv 
 
 Waste land, property in, how acquired xxv 
 
 liable to Ooshr or Khiraj when reclaimed .... xxvi 
 
 cannot be exempted from Khiraj in perpetuity . . . xxvi 
 
 Application of Khiraj to India xxvii 
 
 First attempt to impose it xxviii 
 
CONTENTS. Vll 
 
 PAGE 
 
 System of Akbar xxviii 
 
 Akbar's impost really the Wuzeefa Khiraj . . . . . . xxx 
 
 Persons liable for it became proprietors of the land .... xxxi 
 
 Who they were xxxi 
 
 Reasons for concluding that they were the Ryots xxxii 
 
 Akbar's system not carried out as to whole of the land . . . xxxii 
 
 Firman of Aurungzebe xxxii 
 
 Treats the Ryots as proprietors of Wuzeefa land .... xxxiii 
 
 Zemindars xxxvi 
 
 Superior and Inferior xxxvii 
 
 Condition of Zemindars varied with the demands of the State on the 
 
 produce of the land xl 
 
 Ryots xlii 
 
 Jaghires, early history xliv 
 
 Division of the country under Akbar into Khalsa and Jaghire . . xlv 
 
 Meaning of Jaghire xlvi 
 
 Seyurghal xlviii 
 
 Melkeyet " . . xlix 
 
 Altumgha, two examples of 1 
 
 Tenures of land under the British Government . li 
 Perpetual settlement of Revenue with Zemindars and Talookdars as 
 
 proprietors of the soil lii 
 
 Independent and Dependent, or Pottah Talookdars . . . . lii 
 
 Pottahs described liii 
 
 Jungle booree tenures liii 
 
 Malgoozary Aymas liii 
 
 Estimated value of proprietary rights in the soil liv 
 
 Powers over the Ryots, possessed by or conferred on Zemindars . . Iv 
 
 Effect of the settlement on the condition of the Zemindars and Ryots . Ivi 
 
 Putny Talookdars Ivii 
 
 La-Khiraj Tenures Iviii 
 
 Jaghires lx 
 
 AltumgJia Ixii 
 
 Ayma Ixiii 
 
 Mudud Mash ........... Ixiii 
 
 Furzundan, meaning of Ixiii 
 
 Crhatwallce tenures Ixv 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 OF 
 
 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA, 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Of Ooshr and Khiraj, or Tithe and Tribute 1 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 * 
 
 Of Ooshr as the Zukat on Fruits and Crops 23 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Of the Imposition of Tithe and Tribute upon Land .... 32 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Of the Khooms, or Fifth on Mines and Buried Treasure . . . 36 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Of the Cultivation of Waste Lands 40 
 
 SECTION. 
 Of the Digging or Clearing of "Water-courses and Repairing them . 49 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 Of Moozaraut 52 
 
 APPENDIX. 
 
 No. I. Translation of a Firman by the Emperor Arungzebe . . 71 
 
 No. II. Firman for the appointment of a Jageer . . . . 79 
 
 No. III. Perwanneh for holding a Jageer . . . . . 80 
 
 No. IV. Perwanneh to a Jageerdar 81 
 
 No. V. Firman for a Maintenance 82 
 
 No. VI. Perwanneh for a Maintenance 83 
 
 No. VII. Firman for a Preferment and Removal .... 84, 
 
INTEODUCTOEY ESSAY. 
 
 THERE are two duties or imposts, to one or other of Ooshr and 
 which the cultivated land in Mohammedan countries, or 
 its produce, is generally liable. One of these is the Ooshr 
 or tithe, and land subject to it is called Ooshree ; the 
 other is the Khiraj or tribute, and the land subject to it 
 is called Khirajee. Ooshr, in the language of the law, is 
 the Zukat or poor-rate on the fruits of the earth. Khiraj, 
 in the same language, is a peculiar rate or duty imposed 
 upon the lands of conquered countries whose inhabitants 
 have been left free to the exercise of their own religion. 
 Ooshr is due only on the actual produce of the soil. 
 Khiraj is due on productive land, whether it yield any 
 produce or not. Khiraj is thus more onerous than Ooshr, 
 and falls more properly on infidels or unbelievers in the 
 Mussulman religion ; while Ooshr, for the opposite reason, 
 is more appropriate to Mooslims. 1 Mooslims, moreover, 
 cannot be taxed without their own consent ; and Khiraj, 
 therefore, cannot be imposed on their lands except under 
 peculiar circumstances. Ooshr may be imposed under 
 any circumstances, because, being a religious duty, their 
 consent is implied. Ooshr, again, cannot be received from 
 an infidel ; for it involves an act of piety of which he is 
 deemed to be incapable. There is no objection, however, 
 to the receipt of Khiraj from a Mooslim. The land of 
 the former, therefore, is necessarily subject to Khiraj; 
 while that of the latter may be subject either to Ooshr or 
 
 1 Hidayah and Kifaydh, vol. ii. p. 775. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 How first 
 imposed 
 upon the 
 land of 
 conquered 
 countries. 
 
 Khiraj. No land can be subject to both Ooshr and 
 Khiraj at the same time. 1 
 
 The circumstances under which the land of Moham- 
 medan countries became originally subject to Ooshr or 
 Khiraj are detailed in the third chapter of the following 
 selections. The law on the subject maybe briefly summed up 
 as follows : It is founded on a supposed obligation of all 
 mankind to embrace what is called the true religion, or to 
 submit to the true ' Believers,' and the counter obligation of 
 the true believers to war upon all men to the last extremity, 
 until they adopt one or other of these alternatives. Before 
 commencing a war for this purpose, it is the duty of the 
 Imam, or head of the Mooslim community, to invite the 
 inhabitants of the country which he is about to invade, to 
 embrace the true religion ; and without this formality the 
 war is unlawful. If they accept the invitation, they are 
 to be treated in all respects like other Mooslims, and the 
 Ooshr, as a matter of course, is imposed on their lands. 
 If they reject the invitation, they are next to be called on 
 to submit to the Juzyut, or capitation tax, and become 
 subjects of the Mooslim power. If they accept these 
 terms, they are admitted to the condition of Zimmees or 
 subjects, and are left free to the profession of their own 
 religion ; but the Khiraj is imposed upon their lands. 
 The idolaters of Arabia were excepted from this indulgence, 
 and were called upon absolutely to embrace the faith, 
 with the only alternative of the sword for their men, 
 and slavery for their women and children. If the people 
 to whom the call to Islam or the Juzyut is addressed 
 reject both the alternatives, they are to be warred upon to 
 the last extremity, and, if conquered, the whole of their 
 property passes to the conquerors, without any distinction 
 between what is moveable and what is immoveable, or 
 between what belongs to the State and what to private 
 individuals. The moveable property is plunder, without 
 
 1 According to Shafei, the leader of another of the Soonnee 
 sects, when a Mooslim cultivates Khirajee land, the produce is 
 subject to Ooshr as well as to the Khiraj. Maverdy, pp. 205-6. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 any difference of opinion among Soonnees, and ought to 
 be divided among the soldiers of the conquering army. 
 According to Shafei, the land also is plunder, and should in 
 like manner be divided among the soldiers. According to 
 Malik, it becomes wukf, or an appropriation for the 
 general benefit of Mussulmans. According to Aboo Huneefa, 
 the Imam, or head of the Mussulman community, has an 
 option, and may divide the land among the soldiers, or 
 bestow it on the people of the country, even though they 
 should persist in rejecting the true religion, or he may 
 reserve it in the manner of a wultf, for the purposes of 
 war. 1 If he adopts the first alternative, Ooshr, or tithe 
 is to be imposed upon the land, unless it is connected 
 with what is called Khiraj water ; while if he should 
 bestow the land upon the conquered people, the Khiraj 
 is to be imposed upon it. The reason assigned for this 
 is that, being due, whether the land is cultivated or not, 
 it is burdensome, and, being in the nature of a punishment, 
 is thought to be more appropriate than Ooshr to their 
 condition as infidels. According to one authority (p. 2), 
 connection with Khiraj water is a condition of the im- 
 position of Khiraj, even when land is bestowed on the 
 original inhabitants without their embracing the faith of 
 Islam ; and this view is supported to some extent by a 
 passage in Mr. Hamilton's translation of the Hidayah. 9 
 But the translation is not borne out by the printed 
 original, 4 and the author of the Hidayah himself asserts 
 positively 5 that the conquered land in the supposed case 
 is ipso facto Khirajee, though he adverts to a somewhat 
 different opinion in the Jama Sagheer. Other authorities 
 (p. 35) support the assertion of the author of the Hidayah, 
 averring positively that, when the Imam grants their lives 
 and freedom together with their property to the inhabi- 
 tants of the conquered country, he may impose the Khiraj 
 on their lands whether the water be Ooshree or Khirajcc. 
 And this conclusion is confirmed by the consideration 
 
 1 Fut. Al. vol. ii. p. 201 . 2 Hidayah and Kifayah, vol. ii. r- 
 Vol. ii. p. 206. 4 Vol. ii. p. 775. 5 Ibid. 
 
Xll INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 that otherwise unbelievers would have the land on a more 
 favourable condition than Mooslims, as Ooshr cannot be 
 received from infidels. Reason, as well as the weight 
 of authority, is thus in favour of religion as being the 
 leading principle for determining the liability of land to 
 Ooshr or Khiraj. When lands are conferred on persons 
 who are not of the Musulman faith, Khiraj is the proper 
 duty, without reference to any distinction of waters ; when 
 it is conferred on Mooslims, Ooshr is the proper duty ; 
 and it is only when the land is connected with Khiraj 
 water that the Khiraj can be imposed upon it. 
 
 The same rules are applicable generally to waste lands 
 (pp. 3 and 48) when first brought into cultivation. It is, 
 therefore, still of some importance to endeavour to ascer- 
 tain exactly what waters are Ooshr water and what are 
 Khiraj. 
 
 Ooshr and The authorities on the subject are long subsequent to the 
 water J ^ rs ^ i m po s ition of the Khiraj, and must therefore be under- 
 stood as indicating the waters that were held to be Ooshr 
 and Khiraj waters in the time of the writers rather than 
 such as were originally so. The first authority on the subject 
 in the following selections is an extract from the Shurih- 
 Tahavee (p. 2), where, referring to what produce of land is 
 subject to Ooshr, it is said, that ' it makes no difference 
 whether the land be watered by rain from the heavens or 
 by running water ; ' thus indicating that there is some differ- 
 ence between waters derived from these respective sources. 
 
 Further on we have extracts from the Moheet and the 
 Kafee (p. 28), in which Ooshr and Khiraj waters are dis- 
 tinctly opposed to each other, and the former is said to be 
 the water of wells and fountains in Ooshree land, together 
 with rain and the waters of great seas ; while the latter 
 is said to be the water of wells and fountains in Khirajee 
 land, together with the water of the Persian canals and 
 the great rivers Syhoon, Tigris, and Euphrates. Leaving 
 the waters of wells and fountains out of consideration on 
 both sides for the present, we have only rain and the water 
 of great seas as Ooshr water on the one side, with the 
 Persian canals and the waters of the Syhoon, Tigris, and 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Xlll 
 
 Euphrates as Khiraj water on the other. By seas are to 
 be understood any large bodies of water, and the term is 
 qualified in the Hidayah 1 by the words 4 which are not 
 under the power of any one.' The same thing may mani- 
 festly be predicated of rain, and this is apparently the 
 point in which rain and the water of great seas or lakes 
 agree with each other, and both are distinguished from 
 the canals and great rivers particularly mentioned. With 
 regard to the rivers, there was a difference of opinion 
 among the Hanifite doctors. Moohummud thought that 
 they are not under the power of anyone, since no one can 
 protect their waters so as to prevent their use by others ; 
 that therefore their waters are Ooshr waters. Aboo Hu- 
 neefa and Aboo Yoosuf, on the other hand, held them to be 
 Khiraj waters. The reason of Aboo Huneefa's opinion is 
 not given, but Aboo Yoosuf 's was founded on the con- 
 sideration that bridges of boats being cast across their 
 streams they may be said to be brought under the power 
 of some one. Without having recourse to the reason 
 assigned by Aboo Yoosuf, it may, I think, be fairly as- 
 sumed that the waters as well as the land of a country 
 are generally under the power of its inhabitants or their 
 rulers, and therefore pass by conquest over them to their 
 conquerors. They may, accordingly, like the land, be 
 divided by the Imam among his soldiers, or restored to 
 the original inhabitants. Wells and fountains can hardly 
 be separated from the lands in which they are situated, 
 and would naturally become Ooshr or Khiraj water, 
 according as the Ooshr or Khiraj were imposed on the 
 land. Other waters may be comprehended generally 
 under the head of running waters or rivers. Of these the 
 smaller rivers might be distributed among classes of per- 
 sons or individuals, pretty much in the same way as the 
 land, and their waters might thus become Ooshr or Khiraj 
 water, according as the land through which they passed 
 were made the one or the other. The greater rivers, on 
 the other hand, passing through many countries, could 
 
 1 Translation, vol. i. p. 51. 
 
XIV INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 not be so distributed, and would therefore always remain 
 under the control of the Imam. This we are told was 
 actually the case. Rivers are said to be of three kinds 
 (p. 49) 1st. Great or public rivers; 2nd. General rivers; 
 and 3rd. Private rivers. Of these the two last, though 
 distinguished from each other in some respects, agree in 
 this, that they have both entered into division; while 
 the first class, of which the three rivers already mentioned, 
 together with the Jyhoon and Nile, are given as types, 
 have never been divided. They remain, therefore, under 
 the power of the Imam for the general benefit of the Mus- 
 sulman community ; and on him is imposed the duty of 
 keeping their channels clear. For this purpose he may 
 employ the funds of the Khiraj department of the public 
 treasury, or, if there be none, even compel the people to 
 work (p. 49). It may therefore be assumed that he must 
 have some power over the use of their waters. The only 
 way in which this seems to have been exercised in the 
 olden times was by imposing the Khiraj on land fructified 
 by them. In later times duties may have been imposed 
 upon merchandise passing through their channels, and 
 this may possibly be the origin of the tolls which are still 
 levied at some places on the great rivers of India. Water 
 being the great fructifying element of land in countries where 
 heat, the other element, is usually in excess, the waters of 
 the great rivers would naturally be termed Khiraj waters, 
 as the source from which the Khiraj was ultimately 
 derived ; while rain and the water of the great seas or 
 lakes would as naturally be termed Ooshr water, as the 
 source from which the Ooshr was ultimately derived. 
 This seems to have been the reason for applying the terms 
 Ooshree and Khirajee to water as well as to land ; for the 
 termination ee in both words signifies nothing more than 
 relation generally. 
 
 Countries ^^ e Sowad of Irak, on which Omar imposed the Khiraj 
 
 that are when he restored the lands to the original inhabitants, 
 
 was watered by the Persian canals. Syria, on which he 
 
 also imposed it, and Egypt, on which it was imposed 
 
 by Arnroo Ebn-al-Aas, are both watered by great or public 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XV 
 
 rivers. In none of these cases does it appear that any 
 distinction was made on account of the religion of the 
 persons on whom the land was bestowed. On Arabia, Others 
 
 . , ., that are 
 
 again, of which only a very small part, if any, can be said Ooskrce. 
 to be within the influence of a great or public river, the 
 Khiraj was never imposed by the Prophet or any of his 
 successors, though a part of the land was left in the pos- 
 session of a Christian tribe called the Beni Toghlib. 
 The whole of Arabia, therefore, is Ooshree. But upon 
 the lands of the Tooghlibees a double Ooshr was imposed ; 
 and to meet the difficulty of the Ooshr not being properly 
 receivable from any but Mooslims, this Ooshr is carried 
 to the Khiraj department of the public treasury, where 
 it is applied to the same purpose as the Khiraj. The 
 double Ooshr having been imposed on the Tooghlibees 
 under a special composition, which is termed Sooluh, the 
 land so subjected to the double Ooshr has been termed 
 Sooluhee ; and the lands of the whole Mohammedan 
 world have thus come to be sometimes described as of 
 three kinds, Ooshree, Khirajee, and Sooluhee. Corres- 
 ponding with these three descriptions of land are three 
 classes of persons, all of whom are termed Maliks, or pro- 
 prietors, viz., Mooslims; Zimmees, or infidel subjects in 
 general; and Tooghlibees, or persons belonging to the 
 tribe of Tooghlib. 1 
 
 If land is purchased from a Tooghlibee by a Zimmee, Ooshree 
 it remains subject to the double Ooshr, according to all 
 opinions. So also, according to Moohummud, if it is pur- Khirajee 
 chased by a Mooslim, or the Tooghlibee himself is con- 
 verted to the faith ; and even if Ooshree land be trans- 
 ferred from a Mooslim to a Zimmee, or a Tooghlibee, it 
 remains, according to Moohummud, subject to Ooshr as 
 before, the character originally impressed upon it being 
 indelible in his opinion. According to Aboo Yoosuf, if a 
 Tooghlibee transfer his land to a Mooslim, the latter is 
 liable only for a single Ooshr ; while if a Mooslim sell his 
 Ooshree land to a Zimmee, the purchaser becomes liable 
 
 1 Kifayah, vol. i. p. 535. And see Ay. Akb. vol. i. p. 349. 
 
XVI 
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 Kkirajee 
 land main- 
 tains its 
 character 
 under all 
 changes of 
 property. 
 
 Wasteland 
 when 
 brought 
 into culti- 
 vation,how 
 subjected 
 to Ooshr 
 or Khiraj. 
 
 Kkiraj, 
 
 to a double Ooshr ; the land, in Aboo Yoosuf 's opinion, 
 changing its character with the religion of its owner. 
 Aboo Huneefa agreed with Moohummud with regard to the 
 transfer of Tooghlibee land to a Mooslim, but differed 
 from him as to Ooshree land, which, when transferred to a 
 Zimmee, and taken possession of by him, loses its charac- 
 ter, according to Aboo Huneefa, and becomes Khirajee. 
 If the land is taken by another Mooslim under a claim of 
 pre-emption, or is returned to the seller on account of a 
 defect, it becomes again liable to Ooshr, as before. But 
 these are the only instances mentioned of a return to its 
 original character ; and it may therefore be presumed 
 that, the land having become Khirajee, would, in the opi- 
 nion of Aboo Huneefa, remain so though subsequently 
 transferred to a Mooslim. When the three doctors differ, 
 the opinion of Aboo Huneefa is generally received as law, 
 and, accordingly, though the Hidayah is quoted as the au- 
 thority, only so much of it as contains his opinion is given 
 on this point in the Futawa Alumgeeree (p. 27). 
 
 It is only Ooshree and Sooluhee lands that are thus 
 liable to mutations of character upon transfer to persons 
 of different religions. The character of Khirajee land 
 remains unchanged in every mutation of property, accord- 
 ing to the three doctors ; and this, with the changes to 
 which Ooshree land is liable according to the prevailing 
 opinion, will account for the small quantity of Ooshree 
 land which may now be found in some countries that have 
 been long subject to Mohammedan rule. In India, the 
 Ooshree character seems to be entirely lost, and the 
 name is I believe hardly known. 
 
 Waste land when brought into cultivation by a Mooslim, 
 is, according to Aboo Yoosuf, Ooshree if contiguous to 
 Ooshree land, and Khirajee if contiguous to Khirajee 
 land ; but, according to Moohummud, it is the one or the 
 other according to the nature of the water by means of 
 which it has been reclaimed. When brought into culti- 
 vation by a Zimmee, it is Khirajee under all circum- 
 stances and without any difference of opinion (p. 48). 
 
 Having now determined the conditions under which 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XV11 
 
 land is subject to Ooshr or Khiraj in Mohammedan Its special 
 countries, and shown the tendency of Ooshree land ulti- c arac 
 mately to become Khirajee, let us attend a little more 
 closely to the special character of the Khiraj, with a view 
 to ascertain if we can the relative rights in the land of 
 the parties to and by whom it is payable. 
 
 A tax of the same nature as the Khiraj existed in the Existed in 
 Sowad of Irak in the time of its Persian rulers. It was j )flj fo re ^ e 
 originally levied by a division of the produce between the conquest, 
 sovereign and the cultivator. But that mode of levying 
 the tax being deemed oppressive by Cobad, he caused the 
 land to be measured, and imposed a rate of a kufeez in 
 grain and a dirhem in money upon each jureeb of it. 
 Some say that this was done by his more celebrated son 
 Nowshirvan, and it is probable that the arrangement 
 commenced by the father was completed by the son. A 
 kufeez was held to be of the value of three dirhems, so 
 that the whole rate thus imposed upon the land was 
 equivalent to four dirhems on every jureeb. Up to this 
 time there seems to have been no legal limit to the 
 sovereign's demand, but it is said of the Khoosroes, or 
 Persian sovereigns, by Mohammedan writers (p. 19) that, 
 when calamity overtook the crop of the cultivator they 
 used to indemnify him for his seed and maintenance, 
 saying : 6 The Moozarea is our partner in profit, how then 
 shall we not share with him in loss ? ' From this it would 
 seem that, in the opinion of these writers, a co-partner- 
 ship in the produce subsisted between the sovereign and 
 the cultivator, like that which was afterwards known in the 
 Mohammedan law under the name of Moozdraut. That 
 contract is similar to the metayer system of Europe ; 
 and, under both systems, the cultivator is no more than 
 a tenant holding under another who is the proprietor of 
 the soil. According to that analogy, the rulers of the 
 Sowad were originally the proprietors of the land. But 
 the analogy fails after the conversion of their share in the 
 produce to a fixed rate on every jureeb of the land ; 
 for the reservation under a contract of Moozdrunt of a 
 fixed quantity, instead of a share in the produce, vitiates 
 
 b 
 
XV111 
 
 INTRODUCTOKY ESSAY. 
 
 Persian 
 tax 
 
 adopted by 
 Omar with 
 some vari- 
 ations. 
 
 Khiraj 
 
 divided 
 
 into two 
 
 kinds, 
 
 Mookasu- 
 
 mah and 
 
 Wuzeefa. 
 
 that contract (p. 54). The cultivators would, therefore, 
 cease to be Moozareas after the settlement by Cobad, and 
 would, in the view of the Mohammedan lawyers, become 
 proprietors, if only for want of any other category in which 
 to place them. 
 
 The tax to which the land of the Sowad was found to be 
 subjected at the time of the Mussulman conquest was 
 generally adopted by Omar, but increased for some kinds 
 of produce, which were supposed to require a less degree of 
 labour to bring them to maturity. Thus, the rate imposed 
 upon a Jureeb, or square of sixty zira of grain, was, as 
 already observed, equivalent in value to four dirhems. On 
 the same extent of vegetables or plants whose roots remain 
 in the ground for several years, the rate imposed was five 
 dirhems in money; and on a similar quantity of land 
 planted with vines and date trees, which were calculated 
 to endure for many years, the rate imposed was ten 
 dirhems. It does not appear, that at the time when the 
 assessment was made, there were any other kinds of pro- 
 duce in the Sowad than such as fell under one or other 
 of the three descriptions above mentioned. But saffron 
 and cotton are specified in the Hidayah and other autho- 
 rities as not being included; and gardens or pleasure- 
 grounds, where the trees are too widely dispersed to allow 
 of their being classed with vineyards or date orchards, are 
 also noticed as being different from any of the descrip- 
 tions mentioned. In cases of this kind, for which the 
 example of Omar afforded no precedent, a Khiraj was 
 afterwards imposed as the occasion arose, which was some 
 proportionate share of the whole produce. 
 
 The Khiraj came thus to be divided into two kinds, 
 Mookasumah and Wuzeefa. The former is a share of 
 the produce, as a fifth, a sixth, or the like, and depends 
 on the actual crop or issue from the land, not on the 
 kind of crop which it is capable of bearing ; in so much 
 that, like Ooshr, it is not due when the land, though 
 capable, is allowed to lie idle. The latter, or Wuzeefa, is 
 ' something in obligation,' that is, a personal liability on 
 account of a definite portion of land, and is dependent on 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XIX 
 
 the return that the land is capable of yielding. It is, 
 therefore due so long as the land retains its capability, 
 whether it be cultivated or not. It has thus that quality 
 which is supposed to render Khiraj more appropriate 
 than Ooshr to the lands of unbelievers, and we might 
 therefore reasonably infer that, when the lands of a con- 
 quered country are restored to the original inhabitants, 
 without requiring their adoption of the faith of Islam, it 
 is the Wuzeefa, and not the Mookasumah, that would be 
 imposed upon them. We are not left to conjecture upon 
 this point ; for in the only undoubted examples we have 
 of the formal imposition of Khiraj on the land of any 
 conquered country, viz., that of Omar in the cases of the 
 Sowad, Syria and Egypt, there is no doubt that the 
 Khiraj was Wuzeefa. Again, when Ooshree land is trans- 
 ferred from a Mooslim to a Zimmee, and becomes liable 
 to Khiraj, as already mentioned, it is the same quality 
 peculiar to the Wuzeefa, of being due whether the land is 
 cultivated or not, that has been assigned as the reason for 
 the change of the impost ;* and it is therefore the Wu- 
 zeefa which must be imposed on the land in such circum- 
 stances. Further, when waste land is brought into culti- 
 vation and becomes liable to Khiraj, it is the Wuzeefa 
 which is to be imposed upon it, for it is expressly said 
 that a liability to Wuzeefa is one of the effects or conse- 
 quences that result from the reclaiming of waste (p. 48). 
 These are the only cases in which we can predicate with 
 any certainty that the Khiraj has ever been imposed 
 upon the land of a conquered country ; and in all of them 
 it is evident that, in the opinion of the Hanifite doctors, 
 the establishment of a right of property in the land in 
 favour of some one is a necessary preliminary to the impo- 
 sition of the Khiraj. In the two first cases the establish- 
 ment of the right, as we have seen, is by positive grant 
 from the conquerors, and in the last by the act of recla- 
 mation from waste, as will be shown hereafter. 2 Accord- 
 ingly, the lands of the Sowad on which Khiraj was im- 
 
 1 Hedaya, vol. i. p. 536. 2 Post. p. xxvi. 
 
 b2 
 
XX INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 posed for the first time, are expressly said to be " the 
 property of the inhabitants, who may lawfully sell or other- 
 wise dispose of them ;" l and generally, by Hanifite writers, 
 the Khiraj is said to be due by the proprietors of the land, 
 as if there must in all cases be a proprietor of Khirajee 
 land, distinct from the party to whom the Khiraj is pay- 
 able. It is true that this is said of the Khiraj generally, 
 but there is no personal responsibility in the case of Moo- 
 kasumah, and it must therefore be of the Wuzeefa that 
 the writers are speaking. Moreover, there is only the 
 doubtful instance of Kheiber on record, in which it seems 
 that anything like a Mookasumah Khiraj was ever for- 
 mally imposed upon any land. Of this case two accounts 
 are given in the Hidayah. In one it is said that the 
 Prophet divided the lands among his followers. 2 In the 
 other that he left the lands in the possession of the inha- 
 bitants on condition of their giving him half the produce. 
 This is the view that was taken of the case both by Aboo 
 Huneefa and his two disciples ; but while he refers to the 
 case as an example of Mookasumah Khiraj, they insist 
 that it was one of Mozaraut. They all, however, seem to 
 have agreed that whatever was done was by way of special 
 composition, which agrees with what we are told by the 
 historians, that it was not till after a long and valiant re- 
 sistance, that the people of Kheiber surrendered upon the 
 terms referred to. 4 In no sense, therefore, does the case 
 form a precedent for the disposal of lands acquired by 
 mere force of arms. The conclusion, then, to which I 
 Land sub- k ave oome on h e whole matter is, that wherever we find 
 
 J6CL tO 
 
 Wuzeefa is land subject to a Wuzeefa Khiraj in a country acquired 
 
 pertjMrf by force of arms, there, both by reason and precedent, we 
 
 parties by ought to infer that the land is the property of the persons 
 
 payable. by whom the Khiraj is rendered or paid ; but that where- 
 
 ever, on the other hand, the Khiraj is Mookasumah, we 
 
 have neither reason nor precedent for the same inference, 
 
 1 Hedaya, vol. ii. p. 205. 
 
 2 P. 159. 
 
 3 Ibid. vol. iv. p. 39. 
 
 4 Mod. Un. History, vol. i. p. 113. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. xxi 
 
 and ought rather to conclude, if only for want of evidence 
 to the contrary, that the conquerors have never parted 
 with the rights acquired by conquest, and that the land 
 therefore is the property of the sovereign as representative 
 of the Imam, or Head of the Mussulman community. 
 
 The rates of the Wuzeefa are restricted to those esta- Kate of the 
 blished by Omar. No higher rate can, according to the ^^f^ Bt 
 prevailing opinion among the Hanifites, be lawfully im- imposed 
 posed on any land in the first instance by any of his exceedthat 
 successors. But there is no doubt that the rate may be f Omar, 
 less if the land is unable to bear one so high. Omar may'be 
 himself is said to have imposed lower rates upon Syria. less - 
 Thus, instead of a uniform rate of a kufeez and a dirhem 
 for every jureeb of land fit for sowing, he is said to have 
 restricted that rate to land fit for wheat, and to have im- 
 posed only two dirhems on the jureeb of land fit only for 
 barley. So also, instead of a uniform rate of ten ddrhems 
 for a jureeb of orchards, he reduced the rate to eight 
 dirhems for date trees, and to six for sugar-cane. So that 
 he seems to have made the capability of the land his 
 standard of rating in all cases ; and, accordingly, the rule 
 which has been deduced from his example, for all cases in 
 which he has left no positive precedent, is to impose such 
 rates as the land may be supposed to be capable of bearing 
 with reference to its natural fertility, the kind of crops 
 commonly grown upon it, and its facilities in respect of 
 water circumstances in which some lands differ materially 
 from others. 1 No land is supposed to be capable of bearing 
 a rate exceeding half of its produce. That, therefore, is 
 said to be the extreme of capability ; and any Wuzeefa in 
 excess of it would be unlawful. 
 
 The same rule is applicable to the imposition of the Rate of 
 Mookasumah, which may be any share of the produce not m ^ c ^_" 
 exceeding a half ; the exact proportion being left to the not exceed 
 Imam to fix as he may think proper (p. 7). produce. 
 
 1 Maverdy, p. 257. Considerations of this kind seem to have 
 influenced Akbar in his assessment of India. He also kept in 
 view the neighbourhood of cities. Ay. Akb. vol. i, p. 347. 
 
XX11 
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 Sovereign 
 entitled to 
 receive the 
 Khiraj. 
 
 Remedies 
 for its 
 recovery. 
 
 So far as to the original imposition of the Khiraj. If, 
 by reason of a falling-off of the crop, the land should be 
 unable to bear the rates imposed upon it, they may be 
 lawfully reduced according to all opinions (p. 6) ; whether 
 an addition can be made to the rates when, by reason of 
 an abundant crop, the land is able to bear it, is liable to 
 doubts. According to Moohummud, the addition is lawful, 
 but not so according to Aboo Yoosuf, and the author of 
 the Hidayah seems to favour his opinion. 1 But the com- 
 pilers of the Futawa Alumgeeree receive the doctrine with 
 some qualification. They say that, if the rates were 
 originally imposed by Omar himself, or by an Imam acting 
 in express accordance with his example, it would not be 
 competent to him to make any addition to them without 
 the consent of the people, even though the land were able 
 to bear the addition. Still, if he should make the addition, 
 or convert a Wuzeefa to a Mookasumah, or vice versa, 
 and his successor should approve of the act, he may lawfully 
 give currency to it, provided that the land had been 
 originally subdued by force of arms, and then bestowed 
 upon the people. But if the people had peaceably sub- 
 mitted before the grant was made to them, the act of the 
 preceding ruler should be cancelled. In all cases, there- 
 fore, it would seem that, according to the last quoted 
 authority, the Khiraj of a conquered country may be in- 
 creased or varied from one kind to the other at the will of 
 the sovereign, provided that the land is able to bear it, 
 and that it is never raised above a half of the produce. 
 
 Be that as it may, there is no doubt that the sovereign 
 is in all cases entitled to receive the Khiraj, and we have 
 now to enquire what remedies he has for its recovery. 
 The Wuzeefa being a personal liability of the owner of 
 the land, he may be sued for it as for an ordinary debt, 
 and even imprisoned in case of non-payment. There is 
 no such remedy in the case of the Mookasumah, but the 
 occupant of the land has no right to appropriate any part 
 of the produce to his own use, until the proportion appli- 
 
 Hedaya, vol. ii. p. 208. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAT. XX111 
 
 cable to the Khiraj has first been deducted from it, and 
 until that is done the sovereign has a lien on the whole 
 crop, and may prevent any part of it from being removed 
 (p. 22). In no case has he any right to deprive the pro- 
 prietors of their lands and transfer them in property to 
 another, even though the land should be allowed to lie 
 idle for want of means to cultivate it, or though it should 
 be abandoned altogether. The proper course to be pursued 
 in such circumstances is first to let the land to an ordinary 
 tenant, or if none can be found willing to take it on 
 hire, then to deliver it to some one in Moozdraut, and to 
 deduct the Khiraj from the rent, or share in the produce, 
 as the case may be, reserving the remainder for the pro- 
 prietor. Should no person be found willing to take the 
 land on hire or in Moozdraut, it may then be delivered 
 to anyone willing to abide on it for the mere Khiraj l 
 and it is only in the extreme case when all other methods 
 have failed, that the land may be sold and the Khiraj 
 be deducted out of the price, the remainder, if any, being 
 handed over to the proprietor, or kept for him if he 
 should happen to return (p. 14). 
 
 The purposes to which the Khiraj is to be applied may General 
 be described generally as works and services for the benefit p j po ^! 
 of the Mussulman community ; and the persons upon sons on 
 whom it may be expended, such as soldiers, governors and ^/ ie 
 their assistants, kazees, moofties and police, and the stu- may be 
 dents and teachers of learning, are termed Ahl or people expei 
 of Khiraj. When the owner of Khirajee land belongs 
 to any of these classes, the ruler may apply to him the 
 Khiraj of his own land, that is, leave it with him uncalled 
 for. On this principle it is expressly said that a disposal 
 of the Khiraj in favour of kazees and lawyers would be 
 lawful (p. 11). It may perhaps be inferred that what the 
 sovereign may do in favour of the owner of the land, he 
 may also do in favour of one who is not the owner ; that 
 is, authorise such a person, being duly qualified, to receive 
 and appropriate for his own benefit the Khiraj of any 
 particular land, though it may happen to be the property 
 of others. Whatever may be done in this way is called 
 
XXIV INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 an Iktaa, which means literally a cutting off, as if the 
 exercise of the sovereign's power in the particular instance 
 were a separation of something from a general fund 
 belonging to the community. 
 
 Iktaa, or a The authority before quoted does not seem to go beyond 
 application the Khiraj of one year, but we are informed by Maverdy 1 
 that Iktaas for several years, ten for instance, are lawful, 
 provided that the persons on whom they are bestowed are in 
 the pay of the State, having a fixed allowance entered on 
 the public registers. Soldiers are particularly mentioned 
 as having special claims to Iktaas, which in this case are 
 only a compensation for the lives which they devote to 
 the public service. When the Khiraj is thus granted for 
 a term of years, as ten for instance, and the grantee dies 
 before its expiration, the grant is annulled on the instant, 
 and the Khiraj reverts to the public treasury. 2 But a ques- 
 tion may arise as to its disposal in the event of the grantee's 
 falling sick during the term, and remaining ill till its 
 expiration, so as to be incapable of performing the service 
 for which it was granted. On this point there is a division 
 of opinion, some thinking that the grant should be 
 allowed to continue till the expiration of the term, others 
 that it should be annulled, as in the case of the death of 
 the grantee. 3 
 
 If the grant be for life there is a difference of opinion 
 as to its legality. Those who think that a grant for a 
 term of years is annulled by the confirmed illness of the 
 grantee are of opinion that the grant for life is void, 
 while those again who think differently on that point, 
 are of opinion that it is quite lawful. But even they 
 admit that the Khiraj may be resumed by the sovereign 
 at any time at the end of the current year. 
 
 If the grant is for the life of the grantee, and to his 
 successors and heirs after his death, it is absolutely void ; 
 because by such an Iktaa the Khiraj would pass on from 
 the rights of the public treasury to become an here- 
 ditary property. 4 The Iktaa being void ab initio, the 
 
 1 P. 338. 2 Ibid. p. 339. 3 Ib. p. 340. 4 Ibid. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXV 
 
 grantee must account for all he may have received by 
 virtue of it. If the amount should exceed his allowance 
 from the public treasury, he must restore the surplus, 
 and if it be less he has a claim for the difference. The 
 sovereign should intimate to the persons by whom 
 the Khiraj is payable the invalidity of the Iktaa, and if 
 after such notice they should continue to pay it to the 
 grantee, they will still be liable for it to the public 
 treasury. 
 
 What has been said of Iktaa has reference only to the Waste 
 Khiraj. The land itself may be the subject of a grant in land> 
 perpetuity, as in the case of Ooshree and Wuzeefa lands, 
 which have become the property of private individuals. 
 So also with regard to Mookasumah lands, the presumption 
 being that they are still the property of the State, there 
 seems to be no doubt that they may in like manner be 
 granted to private persons and become their property, 
 subject however to the Khiraj which may be assessed 
 upon them. But, besides all these lands, there are, in 
 many countries subject to Mussulman rule, large tracts of 
 territory which have never been reclaimed from a state 
 of nature, or if once reclaimed have fallen back again to 
 their pristine condition, insomuch that it may be impossible 
 to trace who ever were their proprietors. Such land is Property 
 waste, and property in it is established by reclaiming it, acquired, 
 that is, by bringing it into cultivation, with the permission 
 of the Imam, according to Aboo Huneefa, and by the 
 mere act of reclaiming it, according to Aboo Yoosuf and 
 Moohummud. When the two disciples concur in opinion 
 against their master, the judge is in general at liberty to 
 adopt whichever of the opinions he may think more con- 
 formable to sound reason and authority. But in India the 
 preference has usually been given to the opinion of Aboo 
 Huneefa. The Imam is accordingly said, in the Futawa 
 Alumgeeree, to have the power of cutting off(IJctaa) waste 
 land ; but it is always to be kept in view, that, even 
 according to Aboo Huneefa, it is not the Imam's permission 
 that constitutes the proprietary right ; for though a person 
 should obtain such permission, and commence his operations 
 
XXVI 
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 Waste 
 land when 
 reclaimed, 
 liable to 
 Ooshr or 
 Khiraj. 
 
 Cannot be 
 exempted 
 from 
 
 Khiraj in 
 per- 
 petuity. 
 
 by a partial clearance of the land, yet if he should dis- 
 continue them before the reclamation is completed, there 
 would be no establishment of property, and any other 
 person would be at liberty, after the expiration of three 
 years, to enter upon the land and reclaim it, supposing 
 that he obtains the permission of the Imam (p. 42). It is 
 therefore the act of reclamation that constitutes the pro- 
 perty, and as soon as that is completed the reclaimer 
 becomes the lawful owner of the land, and may dispose of 
 it at his pleasure ; while, if undisposed of during his life- 
 time, it passes at his death, as a matter of course, to his 
 heirs. 
 
 Waste land when brought into cultivation by a Mooslim, 
 is subject to Ooshr or Khiraj, according to its proximity 
 to similar land, or its facilities of waters, as already ex- 
 plained ; and it becomes immediately liable to one or 
 other of these charges, though neither should be formally 
 imposed upon it. The Ooshr, as well as the Khiraj, is 
 appropriated by law to certain well-defined objects, from 
 which there is no authority for saying that either can be 
 lawfully diverted by the Imam, or his representative the 
 sovereign of the country. The collections on account of 
 both are to be brought into distinct departments of the 
 Beit-ool-mal or public treasury. This, however, is not 
 absolutely necessary ; and the direct application of either 
 cannot be considered a diversion from its legitimate 
 objects. Accordingly it would seem that the Ooshr of a 
 person's land may be lawfully given to the owner himself 
 if he happens to be poor (p. 13); and we have seen that 
 a similar application of the Khiraj is perfectly lawful 
 when the owner of the land is one of the Ahl or people of 
 Khiraj, provided that it does not extend beyond the life 
 of the grantee. An hereditary grant of it being absolutely 
 void, a perpetual exemption from it of any land that is 
 legally subject to it must, by parity of reason, be equally 
 so. Such exemption therefore of waste land, when brought 
 into cultivation and otherwise liable to it, must be con- 
 trary to law ; and there can thus be no such land as is 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXV11 
 
 technically called La-Khiraj, that is, free from Khiraj, 
 except land that is subject to Ooshr. 
 
 II. Having now said all that appeared to me to be Applica- 
 necessary on the subject of the Khiraj generally, I pro- ^ t() 
 ceed to enquire when and how it was applied to any part India. 
 of the Provinces which now constitute the British Empire 
 in India. 
 
 India was invaded on its north-west frontier by Mo- 
 hammedans of the Hanifite sect at the beginning of the 
 eleventh century of our era ; but it was long before it can 
 be said that the 'country was completely subdued. 
 
 In some places the native sovereigns submitted to pay 
 tribute ; l and the people being left under the government 
 of their former rulers no change would necessarily take 
 place in the ownership of the land. In much the greater 
 part of the country, however, the native governments were 
 at length entirely subverted, and the people were ulti- 
 mately brought under the immediate rule of the con- 
 querors. Wherever this took place the ownership of the 
 land must be supposed to have passed, by the mere fact 
 of conquest and operation of law, to the great body of the 
 Mussulman community, represented in the particular place 
 by the sovereign of the conquerors. 
 
 There is no record of the manner in which the land was 
 disposed of at the time of the conquest of India. But it 
 appears that in the time of Aurungzebe there was some 
 land called Ooshree in the country (p. 74). That land, 
 however, might have been originally waste, and brought 
 into cultivation by Mussulmans under circumstances that 
 would not render it liable to Khiraj ; and at present the 
 name of Ooshree land seems to be hardly known in India. 
 On the whole, therefore, there does not seem to be any 
 good reason for supposing that any considerable portion of 
 the land was at the time of the conquest divided among 
 
 * Elphinstone, Hist, of India, p. 508. 
 
XXV111 INT110DUCTOHY ESSAY. 
 
 the soldiers of the conquering host. Nor does it appear 
 with any degree of certainty that any attempt was made 
 formally to impose the Khiraj upon any part of the land 
 attempt to unti * ^ e time of Ala-ood-deen, w hose reign commenced 
 impose the about the year A.D. 1296. It is told of that sovereign by 
 ^oruhe Ferishtah l that he ordered a tax equal to half the gross 
 land. amount of the produce of the lands to be levied through- 
 
 out the kingdom, and to be regularly transmitted to the 
 Exchequer. The same fact is mentioned in the Tareekh of 
 Feroze Shah, 2 where it is said of the same sovereign that he 
 resolved there should be but one rule for the collection of 
 tribute (Kkiraj), and that all cultivation, whether on a 
 small or large scale, was to be carried on by measurement 
 at a certain rate for every biswah. Measurement is the 
 basis of a Wuzeefa^ and the operations of Ala-ood-deen 
 look very like an attempt to impose the Khiraj in that 
 form upon the land instead of the manner in which the 
 revenue was previously raised, It does not appear very 
 clearly how that was ; but it is probable that it was levied 
 partly by a division of the produce with the cultivator, 
 and partly in the form of what was afterwards called a 
 Peshcush, or something in the nature of a tribute from 
 the chiefs or leading men of districts. The system of Ala- 
 ood-deen was never completed, for it is said that his regu- 
 lations came to an end after his death ; 3 and it was not 
 till after a long interval, or till the time of Shere Shah and 
 Selim Shah, that any further attempt was made to impose 
 a Wuzeefa Kkiraj upon the land. These rulers are said in 
 the Ayeen Akbery to be the first who actually abolished 
 the custom of dividing crops 4 which must therefore have 
 existed for some time, and probably before the operations 
 of Ala-ood-deen, as already observed. The changes intro- 
 duced by Shere Shah and Selim Shah were afterwards 
 System of more ful ty developed in the system of Akbar, of which 
 Akbar. I now proceed to give a brief account. 
 
 The first step taken by him was to establish a uniform 
 
 1 Briggs' History, vol. i. p. 346. 2 Elliott, vol. iii. p. 182. 
 3 Ibid. p. 197. 4 Vol. i. p. 354. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXIX 
 
 standard of measure, to which the name of the Ilahee Guz 
 was given, and it corresponded so nearly with the Arabian 
 zira that it is considered in the Eegulations of the Bengal 
 Grove rnment as synonymous with it. 1 The land was then to 
 be divided into square areas of 60 by 60 guz, which were 
 called indifferently jureeb or beegah. So far the measures 
 taken by Akbar were identical with those of Omar. The 
 next step was to divide the lands into four kinds Poolej, 
 Perowty, Checker, and Bunjer. Poolej is land which is 
 cultivated for every harvest, being never allowed to lie 
 fallow. Perowty is land that is kept out of cultivation 
 for a short time, in order that the land may recover its 
 strength. Checker is land which, by reason of excessive 
 rain or inundation, had lain fallow for four years. Bunjer 
 is that which, for the same reason, had not been cultivated 
 for five years. It was only to the first, or Poolej land, that a 
 permanent tax like the Wuzeefa could be immediately ap- 
 plied. Perowty was not to be liable except when actually 
 cultivated, but then it was to pay the same revenue as Poolej. 
 For Checker land a progressive revenue was fixed, which be- 
 gan at two-fifths for the first year, and rose gradually to the 
 fifth, when it became the same as Poolej ; while for Bunjer 
 land the revenue was to be four seers the beegah for the 
 first year, and to rise progressivelyto the fifth year, when 
 it also became fixed at the same rate as Poolej. Poolej 
 being thus ultimately the standard for the four kinds of 
 land, it was only farther necessary to ascertain the average 
 produce of a beegah of such land, and then to determine 
 the proportion of the produce that was to be taken for the 
 revenue. The average was fixed by taking a third of the 
 aggregate produce of good, bad, and middling Poolej land; 
 and the revenue was then fixed at a third of that average. 2 
 Thus the aggregate produce of wheat on a beegah of good, 
 bad and middling Poolej, being found to be 38 maunds and 
 35 seers, a third of that, or 12 maunds 38 seers, was the 
 average ; and a third of that again, or 4 maunds 12| seers, 
 the revenue for a beegah of wheat. In like manner, the 
 
 ^Wilson's Glossary, p. 567. 2 Ay. Akb. p. 355. 
 
XXX 
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 Akbar's 
 impost 
 really the 
 Wuzeefa 
 Khiraj. 
 
 revenue for a beegah of rice was fixed at 4 maunds and 13 
 seers, and of cotton at 2 maunds and 20 seers ; and so on 
 for eleven different kinds of spring crops, and nineteen 
 kinds of autumn crops ; the revenue on each kind of pro- 
 duce being assessed at a fixed quantity of its own kind. 
 The revenue being thus fixed in kind was made convertible 
 into money at an average of the prices for nineteen years; 
 and it was left optional to the husbandman to pay in money 
 or in kind, that is, the fixed average third of each par- 
 ticular produce, or its fixed average price. 1 
 
 But land being generally capable of yielding several 
 kinds of crops, the revenue of any particular quantity, as a 
 beegah, might be composed of different items, and vary 
 from year to year with its actual produce. To avoid this 
 a plan seems to have been very early adopted, if it was 
 not coeval with the first assessment, of fixing the revenue 
 at a lump sum for each beegah, determined, it is probable, 
 according to an average of the crops for which it was sup- 
 posed to be specially adopted. The revenue so fixed was 
 called the Toomar Jummah and Asul, or original, as 
 compared with subsequent additions to it. 
 
 Let us now compare the system of Akbar with what has 
 been said of the Wuzeefa Khiraj. Of the four different 
 kinds into which the land was divided, it was only Peroivty 
 that could not be brought under the conditions of that form 
 of impost. It is true that it was not immediately applied 
 to Checker and Bunjer also, but that was on account of the 
 accidents of excessive rain and inundation to which they 
 had been exposed, and sufficient allowance having been 
 made on that account, they were thenceforth to be treated 
 in the same way as Poolej, and would thus become perma- 
 nently liable to Khiraj, which was the characteristic of the 
 Wuzeefa. We need, therefore, have but little hesitation 
 in saying that the impost levied by Akbar was the 
 Wuzeefa Khiraj of the Mohammedan law, nor in deducing 
 from it the same inference with regard to the property in 
 the land that we have done in the case of that impost. 
 
 1 Ay. Akb. vol. i. p. 364. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXXI 
 
 But why, it may be asked, if the impost was in reality the 
 Wuzeefa, was the name withheld, and no express reference 
 made to the example of Omar. With regard to the name, 
 it is to be observed that the chapter of the Ayeen Akbery, 
 which contains a description of the system, is headed ' Of 
 Tribute,' that is Khiraj, ' and Taxes,' which was probably 
 thought sufficient ; and a reason for omitting any reference 
 to the example of Omar may be found in the fact that an 
 assessment made in express conformity with his example 
 could not be legally increased, 1 whereas the assessment of 
 Akbar was limited to ten years. After the expiration of that Inference 
 term the rates might be increased, but that could not 
 
 affect the right of property, which, we must conclude from for it 
 the character of the Wuzeefa Khiraj, was transferred proprietors 
 
 before the imposition of the tax to some persons who 
 became liable for its payment. We must now endeavour 
 to ascertain who these persons were. 
 
 It has been already observed that the revenue, though Who they 
 convertible into money, might still be paid in kind at v 
 the option of the husbandman. This might be done in 
 either of the methods known as Kunkoot and Bhawely, 
 that is, by an estimate of the crops when standing, or by 
 actual division of the grain when gathered into barns. 
 This option being left to the husbandman points to him 
 as the person immediately liable for the Khiraj. But 
 further, the Ayeen Akbei~y, among other things, contains 
 a description of the duties of certain great officers of the 
 Empire, and among these the duties of the Amil Guzzar 
 or collector of the revenue, for whose guidance very 
 special instructions are given. In these he is directed to 
 consider himself the immediate friend of the husband- 
 man ; ; to assist him with loans of money ; ' to transact 
 his business with each husbandman separately, and ' see 
 that the revenues are demanded with affability and com- 
 placency.' If any calamity befalls the crops the Amil 
 shall immediately investigate the circumstances, make 
 an exact calculation of the loss, and transmit the same to 
 
 1 Ante, p. xxii. 
 
XXX11 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 the presence ; and in particular he is instructed < to agree 
 with the husbandman to bring his rents himself at stated 
 periods, that there may be no plea for employing inter- 
 Sitivators mediate mercenaries.' From all this it is sufficiently clear 
 alone that the revenue, whatever it was, was payable by the ryots 
 the* 16 or cultivators direct to the State, and that they only were 
 revenue held to be liable for it. Hence we are in a manner con- 
 system of str ained by the principles of the Wuzeefa Khiraj to infer 
 Akbar. that it was to these that the right of property in the land 
 was transferred from the conquerors, and that consequently 
 they became its proprietors. 
 
 Akbar's it was probably the intention of Akbar to have ex- 
 
 carried out tended his system to the whole of the lands in his do- 
 as to whole m i n i ons . But that was never done; for in most of the 
 
 or tne g 
 
 land. Sowbahs into which they were divided large tracts of land 
 
 were left unmeasured. On these the public revenue was 
 levied by a different rule technically understood under 
 the Hindoo word Buttai, signifying division ; ] and, though 
 the term Mookasumah may have been also applied to it 
 by Mussulmans, as we know that there was some land 
 called Mookasumah in the time of the Emperor Aurung- 
 zebe (pp. 74, 76) yet there is no evidence beyond the 
 name that a Mookasumah Khiraj was ever formally im- 
 posed upon the land. Even though there were such 
 evidence we should have no right, as already shown, to 
 infer a preliminary grant of the land in that case, and 
 must therefore conclude, with regard to the unmeasured 
 lands, for want of evidence to the contrary, that they 
 would still remain the property of the conquerors, or the 
 sovereign as their representative. 
 
 Firman of I have no means of tracing the tenure of land through 
 ^e rei ns of Jehangire and Shahjehan, but we have an 
 important document of the time of Aurungzebe (p. 74), 
 the son and successor of Shahjehan, from which it appears 
 that the tenure and position of the ryots, or cultivators, 
 was pretty much the same at that time as it had been left 
 by Akbar. This document is a firman which was intended 
 
 1 Ap. F. R. p. 638. 
 
INTEODUCTORY ESSAY. XXxill 
 
 for the guidance of the officers employed in the collection 
 of the revenue ' throughout the protected dominions of 
 Hindoostan, from one extremity to the other.' It follows 
 very closely the instructions of Akbar to his Amil Guz- 
 zars for the treatment of the ryots, or husbandmen. But 
 in the firman we have the distinction strongly marked 
 between the two kinds of Khiraj, leaving no doubt that 
 the rate imposed by Akbar was a true Wuzeefa. In the 
 firman it is called Moivezzef, but this is only a different 
 inflexion from the same root, having the same meaning. 
 From the frequency with which this term occurs in the 
 firman, as compared with Mookasumah, it would seem 
 that a greut deal more of the land had been measured and 
 brought under the system of Akbar than had been accom- 
 plished by Akbar himself. Moreover, what was only an 
 inference from the imposition of the Wuzeefa in the case 
 of Akbar's settlement, has now become a reality ; for at 
 every step the ryots or husbandmen are treated as the pro- Treats the 
 prietors of the land where the Khiraj is Mowezzef. Thus, ry 018 . as 
 first, to show that the rate was levied in the same way as O f Wuzeefa 
 that of Akbar, on different kinds of crops, we have the land - 
 following direction in the eighth paragraph : ' The season 
 for demanding the Khiraj Mowezzef on every species is 
 when the harvest is fit for reaping ; therefore, for every 
 particular species that shall come at that state they shall 
 take the proportion of tribute.' Again, to show that it, 
 and consequently the rate of Akbar, was a true Wuzeefa, 
 we have in the tenth paragraph the following : ' Whoso- 
 ever, notwithstanding he possesses the ability to cultivate 
 his own land, and meets with no impediment, nevertheless 
 suffers it to be uncultivated, let them exact the tribute 
 from other means ; ' which is the very characteristic of that 
 form of the Khiraj. Further, to show that the ryots or hus- 
 bandmen are treated as the proprietors of the land, we 
 have, in the second paragraph : c They (the officers) shall 
 acquire information of the proprietors of the land from 
 whom this tribute is to be collected, whether they cultivate or 
 not.' In the next paragraph, we have : ' In Khiraj Moiuezzef, 
 if the proprietor of the land, for want of means of pro- 
 
 c 
 
XXXIV INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 viding the implements of husbandry, has been unable to 
 cultivate.' Not to multiply extracts, I will only further 
 quote the following from the sixth paragraph : ' In a case 
 of Khiraj Moivezzef, they shall settle for such a rate that 
 the ryots may not be ruined by the lands ; and they 
 shall not on any account exact beyond (the value of) half 
 of the produce, notwithstanding any (particular) ability 
 to pay more.' This extract is further of importance be- 
 cause it defines very clearly what was the ryot's tenure. 
 When the Khiraj was Mowezzef he was proprietor of the 
 land, but subject to a variable rate up to the value of one 
 half of the produce, that is, after the expiration of the 
 ten years' settlement by Akbar. 
 
 I have said in an early part of this essay that it is only 
 where the Khiraj is Wuzeefa that we have any right to 
 infer the existence of a right of property previous to its 
 imposition in the party by whom it is payable. There 
 may possibly, however, be some such right where the 
 Khiraj is Mookasumah, though we are not entitled to 
 infer it. And we know that, with the consent of the 
 sovereign and the ryot, a change may be made from Wu- 
 zeefa to Mookasumah (pp. 7 and 75). So that what 
 appears to be Mookasumah land might have been origi- 
 nally Wuzeefa, and may therefore still be the property of 
 the person in possession of it. Not only so, but a change 
 may, with the like consent, be made from Mookasumah 
 to Wuzeefa. So that it would seem that the holder of 
 Mookasumah land may have some sort of permanent in- 
 terest in the land, though it may fall short of the full 
 right of property enjoyed by the holder of Wuzeefa. Thus 
 we find the holder of Mookasumah land treated as a 
 quasi proprietor in the firman of Aurungzebe, where we 
 have, towards the end, the following words. ' In Khiraj 
 Mokossimeh, every one who is not the (hereditary) pro- 
 prietor of such Khiraj land, whether infidel or Mussulman, 
 having bought it or taken it in mortgage, shall receive 
 the profits with permission (of Government).' I have 
 said quasi proprietor, because it seems from this that, 
 though the possessor of Mookasumah land was entitled 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXXV 
 
 to enjoy it himself, and transmit it to his heirs, he could 
 neither sell nor mortgage it without the permission of the 
 G-overnment. No such permission could of course be 
 legally requisite in the case of a sale or mortgage by the 
 holder of Wuzeefa land. Nor do we find that any attempt 
 to enforce such restriction upon him had been made in the 
 time of Aurungzebe ; for, in the thirteenth paragraph of 
 the firman, we have these words : ' In Khi/raj Mowezzef^ 
 if a person sells a part of his own such tributary land, and 
 the buyer has taken possession (seeing that), if he wishes 
 to cultivate in that year, nobody can hinder him, &c,' 
 And again, towards the end of the next paragraph, we 
 have these words : < If an infidel sells his land to a Mus- 
 sulman, they shall exact from him KJiiraj Mowezzef? 
 In these cases no allusion is made to the permission of 
 Government. So that it would appear that down to the 
 time of Aurungzebe, no attempt had been made to reduce 
 the condition of the holder of Wuzeefa land from his full 
 proprietary rights, though that of the Mookasumah 
 holder seems to have been so much raised as to leave 
 little distinction between him and the Wuzeefa holder, 
 except that while the latter could dispose of his land 
 by sale or mortgage at pleasure, the former could do so 
 only with the permission of the Government. This will 
 prepare us for the disappearance of that distinction, and 
 the substitution of another, as we come down to later 
 times. 
 
 The assessment of Akbar was limited to the value of a 
 third of the produce of the land, and it would seem, 
 prima facie, that the ryot must have been free to retain 
 the whole of the remaining two-thirds for his own bene- 
 fit. But that did not follow as a matter of course. There 
 might have been some o^her party entitled, by custom or 
 virtue of some right recognised by the ryot, to a portion 
 of it ; and the difference between a third and a half of the 
 produce, which the law considered generally sufficient for 
 the maintenance of the cultivator and his family, or one 
 sixth of the whole, might thus have been left for the 
 benefit of such other party, though in strictness he could 
 
 c 2 
 
XXXVI INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 have no legal right to it after the ryot had become the 
 proprietor of the land. 
 
 Zemindars. In the Ayeen Akbery, mention is made of a class of 
 persons called Zemindars, as forming an important part 
 of the Military Force of the Empire. In Bengal they 
 are described as furnishing large bodies of cavalry and 
 infantry, besides cannon, boats, and elephants ; while the 
 Soubah of Berar is said to be full of them, and they are 
 described as being very powerful in Ajmeer. Speaking 
 generally of the Army of the Empire, the Zemindary 
 troops alone are said to have been upwards of four 
 millions. The word Zemindar, or more correctly Zumeen- 
 dar, is a compound of two Persian words, Zumeen (land) 
 and dar (holder), and means literally a holder of land. 
 The name, therefore, could hardly have been given to any 
 class of persons who had no recognised connection with 
 the land ; while the above descriptions of them preclude 
 the idea of their being the ryots or cultivators. Further, 
 it is difficult to imagine how in those ages such large 
 bodies of troops could be maintained unless their supplies 
 had been derived in some way from the land; which 
 would imply some degree of power over it or its occupants 
 in the persons who were obliged to furnish them. 
 
 In the Mulfoozat Timooree, or Memoirs of Timour, we 
 meet with frequent notices of powerful chiefs, sometimes 
 submitting to that Emperor on his invasion of India, and 
 as often in rebellion against him. In a Persian transla- 
 tion of that work made in the reign of Shah Jehan, these 
 chiefs are called Zemindars ; and if we may assume that 
 the persons so styled belong to the same class as the persons 
 to whom the name is applied in the Ayeen Akbery, the 
 account which is given of one of them in particular in 
 the Mulfoozat., may perhaps afford some insight into the 
 secret of that power which enabled them to support so 
 large a number of retainers. The individual alluded to 
 was a Zemindar called Malik Shaikha of the family of 
 Kokhlar. His brother Nasrut had been formerly Governor 
 
 1 Ay. Akb. vol. i. p. 239. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXXVll 
 
 of Labor on the part of Sultan Mahmoud of Delhi, and after 
 his defeat Mal'k Shaikha ' had been the first of all the 
 Zemindars and Grovernors of Hindoostan,' to give in his 
 submission to the conqueror. For this reason Timour 
 observes of him in the Memoirs, ' I was very considerate 
 for his subjects, and whenever any Zemindar of that 
 country represented himself to be a dependent of Shaikha 
 Kokhlar, I protected him from the assaults of my fol- 
 lowers, and from pillage and plunder.' l Shaikha, it seems, 
 remained in attendance on the Emperor from ' his capture 
 of Delhi till his passage of the Jumna ;' but then, having 
 asked for and obtained permission to return to Lahor, 
 ' he forgot his protestations of service and devotion,' and 
 princes and Amirs were sent to ' take that ungrateful man 
 prisoner, and to levy a ransom from Lahor.' In reply to 
 their report, the Emperor proceeds : ' I wrote that as 
 Shaikha had proved false to his engagements, his country 
 was to be plundered and himself sent in chains to my 
 presence.' From this account it appears that there were Superior 
 at that time two kinds of Zemindars one superior, having ^ n f d . 
 a country and subjects, and the other inferior or depen- Zemin- 
 dent ; and it is at least probable that the former may have dars ' 
 been the successors of ancient Rajahs, or rulers of the 
 country ; while the latter were subordinate chiefs, or per- 
 haps proprietors, of the country; and that both the superior 
 and inferior had been left at the first conquest of the country 
 in the possession of some of the powers which they 
 originally had in their particular districts, so far as was 
 consistent with a general subjection to the conquerors. 
 
 This conjecture derives some confirmation from the fact 
 that, at the time of the perpetual settlement of the 
 revenue in Bengal, Behar and Orissa, there were still 
 superior and inferior Zemindars, 2 the latter of whom were 
 more or less dependent on the former, and that some of 
 the great Zemindaries even now descend, as being in the 
 nature of sovereignties, by primogeniture, instead of being 
 divisible according to Hindoo and Mohammedan law. 
 
 1 Elliott, vol. iii. p. 473, 2 Ap. F. R. p. 456. 
 
XXXV111 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 Moreover, the conjecture accounts in some degree for the 
 duties which have always been understood to be incum- 
 bent on the Zemindars, of keeping up the roads and pro- 
 tecting travellers in their districts, and also for their re- 
 sponsibilities on account of thefts and robberies committed 
 within them. 
 
 Supposing the superior Zemindars to represent the ori- 
 ginal Eajahs or sovereigns of the country, they would under 
 the Hindoo law have been entitled to a share in the pro- 
 duce of the land. But, ' this being limited to a sixth, or at 
 most a fourth, there must (as observed by Mr. Elphin- 
 stone) have been another proprietor for the remaining 
 five-sixths or three-fourths, who must obviously have 
 had the greatest interest of the two.' The ryots or cul- 
 tivators would, no doubt, have had some, perhaps the 
 greatest, part of these shares ; yet if they had the whole, 
 it would seem that they would in the course of time have 
 risen above the condition of mere tillers of the ground, so 
 as ultimately to have others of that class under them. It 
 does not appear, however, that any such change has taken 
 place in their condition, which seems to have been pretty 
 much the same in all ages. For this reason it appears to 
 me probable that there were others to participate with 
 them in the shares of the produce left untouched by their 
 kings, and that those parties were the class of persons 
 afterwards known as inferior Zemindars, or Chowdhries, 
 who would otherwise have been unprovided for. All 
 rights or interests in the land or its produce were extin- 
 guished by the Mussulman conquest, but the conquerors 
 for a considerable time after their first invasion appear to 
 have cared for little but revenue. The easiest and simplest 
 way for obtaining that was to leave the civil government 
 of the country with the native chiefs, supreme or inferior, 
 in whose hands they found it, and to employ them in tjie 
 collection of the revenues already established in the 
 country. Accordingly, we find from Ferisktah that so late 
 as the reign of the Sultan Mahomed Shah, in the year 
 1438, use was made in some such manner of the Zemin- 
 dars, whom we have supposed to be the successors or repre- 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXXIX 
 
 sentatives of these chiefs ; for the historian, speaking of 
 the distracted state of affairs, says : ' The farmers and 
 Zemindars, foreseeing the convulsions that were likely to 
 ensue, withheld their revenues, in the hopes of retaining 
 them.' l I suppose things to have remained in this ilate 
 for a considerable time ; the conquerors being satisfied with 
 what could thus be obtained through the Zemindars until 
 they found their government sufficiently established to 
 enable them to impose their own system of revenue, that 
 is the Khiraj, upon the land. Whenever that took place it 
 would have created a revolution in the condition of the 
 Zemindars. Indeed, to depress, if not entirely to extinguish 
 them, seems to have been one of the principal motives which 
 led Ala-ood-deen to impose, as already mentioned, a tax 
 equal to half the annual produce of the lands throughout 
 the kingdom. At that time it would seem that estimates of 
 the produce were required from the Zemindars, and that 
 superintendents were appointed over the collectors, 'to 
 take care that the Zemindars should demand no more 
 from the cultivators than the estimates the Zemindars 
 themselves had made.' 2 And so effectual were these 
 and the other oppressive measures of Ala-ood-deen, 
 that many were left without any money, till at length 
 it came to pass ' that, excepting Maliks and Amirs, 
 officials and Multanis*, no one possessed even a trifle in 
 cash.' 3 
 
 The Zemindars are not mentioned among the exceptions, 
 and it may be presumed that they were reduced to the same 
 dead level of poverty as the rest of the community. The 
 various regulations of Ala-ood-deen came to naught at his 
 death, as already observed, and the extreme pressure on 
 the cultivators being thus removed, a margin of produce 
 would again be left to the Zemindar, who might then rise 
 to the condition in which he was afterwards found at the 
 invasion of Timour. It is further probable that he re- 
 mained in that state, not only to the time of Mahomed 
 
 1 Briggs's Ferishtah, vol. i. p. 537. 2 Ibid. p. 346. 
 
 3 Elliott, vol. iii. p. 179. 
 
x INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 Shah, but also down to that of Selim Shah and Akbar, 
 which will account for his palmy condition at the latter 
 period, when he was able to contribute so largely to the 
 military force of the empire. 
 Condition la this view the condition of the ryot may be supposed 
 
 of Zemin- ,, 
 
 dars varied generally to remain pretty much the same under all cir- 
 demand f cumstances ' wni l e that of the Zemindar would sink with 
 the state every fresh demand on the produce of the land. About 
 duce he f P1 h~ ^ ie commencemen t of the reign of Aurungzebe, that is, in 
 land. the year A.D. 1658, an addition was made to the Asul 
 
 Toomar jummah in Bengal during the administration of 
 Shah Shujah. But so great was the Emperor's ' economy, 
 which allowed no expense for the luxury and ostentation 
 of a Court,' and such 6 the skill and vigilance with which 
 he managed the disbursements of the State,' that they 
 ' afforded him a resource for ,the wants of his people, with- 
 out pressing heavily on their means.' ] Accordingly, we do 
 not hear of any addition to the revenues during the 
 remainder of his reign. Amid the anarchy that followed 
 soon after his death, a number of de facto governments 
 were established throughout the country, and the pressure 
 on the land may thus be supposed to have varied with the 
 exigencies and characters of the rulers in particular locali- 
 ties. At some places in the North- Western Provinces the 
 pressure became so great, that scarcely any of the produce 
 seems to have been left with the cultivators, beyond what 
 was necessary for the subsistence of themselves and their 
 families, and the Zemindars were reduced to a condition 
 very little above that of the ordinary ryots. There is no 
 reason to suppose that the demand on the land was less in 
 Bengal than elsewhere. But during the administration 
 of Jaffier Khan, or from A.D. 1711 to A.D. 1726, a great 
 revolution took place in the state of the Zemindars, for 
 there was ' a universal dispossession of the Zemindars,' 2 
 and a re-arrangement was made of the Provinces into 
 official Zemindaries, in which some of the original Zemin- 
 daries seem to have been included, though under the 
 
 > Mill's Hist. vol. ii. p. 395. ? Ap. F. R. p. 189. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. xli 
 
 name of Talooks or dependencies. These official Zemin- 
 daries were constituted by Sunnuds, from the terms of 
 which it appears that the Zemindars were no longer 
 charged with any military duties, but had become Amils 
 or collectors of the public revenue ; for in the details of 
 their duties, it is expressly stated that they are to ' deliver 
 into the treasury at proper times the due rent of the 
 Sircar,' and that after the expiration of the year ' they 
 take a discharge according to custom, and that they 
 deliver the account of their Zemindary, agreeable to the 
 stated forms, every year, into the Duftar Cana of the 
 Sircar.' Deductions were allowed for certain known 
 charges called muzkoorat, which varied in different 
 Zemindaries, but always included what was called a 
 nankar or bread allowance for the Zemindar himself, 
 and very generally similar provisions called neemtucky 
 and mocudemy for the Kanoongoes and head men of the 
 villages. The nankar was commonly estimated at about 
 ten per cent, of the collections. 1 The Sunnud usually 
 contained a consideration called peshcush, for which it 
 was said to be granted. In the Sunnud to the East India 
 Company for the. Zemindary of the 24 Pergunnahs the 
 peshcush was Ks. 20,101, while in that to Chitun Sing 
 for the Pergunnah of Bishenpoor, the peshcush to the 
 British Government, by whom the Sunnud was granted, 
 was 186 mohurs and two anas. The Zemindary having 
 become an office, was naturally limited to the life of 
 the person to whom the Sunnud was granted, but was 
 frequently renewed to the son of the Zemindar by a 
 fresh Sunnud, which, however, was not issued until the 
 payment of the peshcush. In Behar there was a re- 
 adjustment of the Asul Toomar jummah, as well as in 
 Bengal, but it did not take place till 1685; and some 
 re-arrangement of the province into official Zemindaries 
 seems also to have been subsequently made, though not 
 to the same extent as in Bengal. According to Mr. Shore 
 there were only three great Zemindaries in which the 
 
 1 Mr. Shore's Min. Ap. F. K. p. 184. 
 
xlii INTRODUCTORY ESSAT. 
 
 Zemindar could be considered the Amil or collector on 
 behalf of the government. 1 In all the others the revenue 
 was collected direct from the ryots by Amils appointed 
 by the government ; 2 though the Amils are said to have 
 availed themselves 3 of the assistance of persons called 
 Maliks, who seem to have been the same as those known 
 in Bengal under the name of talookdars. 4 The condition of 
 the Maliks was so much reduced that they are described 
 as being glad to receive what was called malikanah or 
 proprietary right, that is ten per cent., whether on the col- 
 lections or on the whole produce does not distinctly appear. 
 The word malik means literally proprietor (though the 
 name had been given in earlier times to great officers of 
 the state), and indicates that the persons to whom the term 
 was applied were still held in popular estimation to be in 
 some sense proprietors, though -any proprietorship that 
 their ancestors may have originally possessed in the land 
 was extinguished at the Mohammedan conquest, and the 
 land had not been re-granted to them, but to the persons on 
 whom the responsibility for the Khiraj was imposed, that 
 is the ryots or cultivators, as has been already observed. 
 Ryots. The condition of the ryots seems to have remained 
 
 meanwhile pretty much the same as it had always been. 
 The word Mookasumah was lost in the Hindoo word 
 Buttae, and as that form of the Khiraj does not seem to 
 have prevailed to any extent in Bengal, the ryots came to 
 be distinguished only according as the lands which they 
 cultivated did or did not belong to the village in which 
 they reside. The former were called Khood-kasht the 
 latter Pae-kasht ; words which are still in common use, 
 though more properly applicable to the land than to the 
 cultivators. Khood-kasht is a compound of two Persian 
 words, Khood, self and Kasht, a contraction of Kashtu, 
 sown and means literally self-sown, which is somewhat 
 ambiguous. But the true meaning of the expression is 
 well brought out in the following translation by Mr. 
 
 1 Ap. F. R. p. 452. 8 Ibid. p. 451. 
 
 * Ibid. 4 Ib. p. 452. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. xliii 
 
 (Had win of an edict by Jehangire : ] ' The officers of the 
 Khalsa and Jageerdars are positively prohibited from the 
 practice of forcibly taking the ryots' lands and culti- 
 vating them for their own benefit: the words which I 
 have put into italics being in the original Khoodkasht 
 sazund or ' make them Khoodkasht? So that a Khoodkasht 
 ryot must be one who sows for his own benefit. Paekasht, 
 according to the author of the Indian Glossary, means 
 sown by a pae, which again is only a non-resident culti- 
 vator ; but as the word is opposed to Khoodkasht it would 
 seem to indicate, when applied to a ryot, one who does 
 not cultivate for himself but for another, as, for example, 
 on hire. According to Mr. Shore, the Khoodkasht ryots, 
 either from length of occupancy or other cause, have a 
 stronger right than others, and may in some sense be 
 considered as hereditary tenants ; ' * while ' the other class 
 or Paekasht ' are considered as tenants at will, and have 
 only a temporary accidental interest in the soil which 
 they cultivate.' 3 Mr. Shore says, at the same time, that 
 there was a class of ryots who were ' compelled to stand 
 to all losses, and to pay for the land whether cultivated 
 or not, and, as the Paekasht could not be that class, and 
 only two classes are mentioned, it follows that it must 
 have been the Khoodkasht who were compelled to pay for 
 the land whether cultivated or not. But that was the 
 very characteristic of the holder of the Wuzeefa land, 
 and the Khoodkasht ryot can be none other than his suc- 
 cessor or representative, and must, consequently, on the 
 principles of the Mohammedan law, be the actual pro- 
 prietor of the land, and not merely a hereditary tenant, if 
 there could be any such thing under that law, under- 
 standing by tenant one who holds the property of another. 4 
 All, however, that is necessarily implied in that proprie- 
 torship is a right to the productive powers of the soil, 
 without which he would not be able to meet his liability 
 fof the Khiraj. It would be straining the law too far to 
 
 Hist. p. 98. 2 Ap. F. R. p. 192. 3 Ibid. 
 4 See Hedaya, vol. iii. p. 367. 
 
Xliv INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 suppose that the ryot necessarily became entitled to the 
 minerals contained in the soil. 
 
 Jaghires Having now brought down the Zemindar and the ryots 
 
 Wstar 7 ^ ^ e c l se f * ne Mohammedan period, it only remains 
 
 to inquire how the Khiraj, or the Government's share in 
 
 the produce of the land, was disposed of with reference 
 
 to its effect on the tenure of the land. 
 
 In early times a practice seems to have arisen of pay- 
 ing officials, chiefly military, by temporary grants of land, 
 or the revenue derived from it. Thus, so far back as the 
 reign of Shums-ood-deen, or say between A.D. 1211 and 
 A.D. 1236, mention is made of two thousand horse- 
 men who had received grants of villages in the Doab by 
 way of pay. About thirty or forty years later, many of 
 these grants were resumed by Sultan Grheias-ood-deen 
 Bulbul ; l but the practice seems to have continued more 
 or less till the time of Ala-ood-deen, who is said to have 
 entirely disapproved of it, and paid his followers every 
 year with money from the treasury. 2 The practice never- 
 theless was revived under Sultan Feroze, who succeeded 
 to the throne of Delhi A.D. 1351, and is said to have 
 shown great liberality in his grants of revenue, instead 
 of salaries or pecuniary allowances : c to some giving 
 10,000 tunkas, to others 5,000, and to others 2,000, 
 according to the respective ranks and claims of the 
 different office-bearers. These grants were called Nanha, 
 'd word which literally signifies breads, being the plural 
 of the Persian word nan. 
 
 This was anterior to the invasion of Timour ; but we 
 find in the Institutes of that monarch mention of similar 
 grants under the name of YetooL In the translation of 
 that work into Persian, which was made in the time of 
 Jehangir, the son and successor of Akbar, the word is 
 rendered by the term Jageer, and the holder of the Yetool 
 is termed the Jageerdar. These names had already been 
 in use in the time of Akbar, for they occur in the Ayeen 
 Akbery, and the practice of making grants of that 
 
 1 Elliott, vol. iii. pp. 107-8. 2 Ibid. p. 289. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. xv 
 
 description had been carried to such an extent that under 
 the denomination of Jageer ' near two-fifths of the ter- 
 ritory ' are said to have been ' assigned under temporary 
 tenures for the support of the provincial civil and military 
 establishments.' l 
 
 The whole kingdom after the assessment of Akbar is Division 
 thus described by Mr. James Grant, in his able survey of COU ntry 
 the Northern Circars, 2 as being distributed into two great |er . 
 divisions. The first of these comprised the ' lands that 
 were immediately dependent on the Khalsa Shereefa, or 
 royal exchequer,' and which were ' set apart to defray the 
 personal and court expenses of the Emperor, those of his 
 guards and state garrisons, as well as the similar establish- 
 ments of all his delegated representatives throughout 
 the Empire.' The other division comprehended such 
 lands ' as were assigned over to the greater or lesser 
 officers of the Government, for the maintenance of troops 
 and personal dignities by a feudal tenure first called Atkaf 
 then Jageer, signifying territorial possessions so alienated 
 at the will and during the precarious favour of a des- 
 potic monarch.' These lands, ' though generally dis- 
 tinguished by the Arabic term Atka, or the synonymous 
 Persian word Jageer, yet received various more par- 
 ticular denominations from the nature of the different 
 tenures on which they were held.' Thus, the assign- 
 ments to the greater officers of Government were called 
 Foujdarees. By foujdary was understood 'a simple 
 allotment of an extensive territory, with its jurisdiction 
 and revenue, to a foujdar, or military commander, for 
 a limited or indefinite period, under an express obligation 
 of maintaining a certain body of troops to attend the 
 king in person, or any of his lieutenants, in the field.' 
 So also the assignments to the lesser officers of govern- 
 ment, which were ' commonly confined to a single Circar,' 
 were called Tycul. This word, according to the author 
 of the Indian Glossary is ' no doubt a typographical 
 error for Tayool ' (a word which has come down to our 
 
 1 Ap. F. R. p. 253. 2 Ibid. p. 639. 
 
 3 Properly Akta, or Ikta ; see ante, p. xxiv. 
 
xlvi INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 times in connection with the villages conferred on the 
 Kings of Delhi by the East India Company, as a sort of 
 appanage for the support of themselves and dependents) ; 
 and this seems to me to be highly probable. But I 
 cannot agree with the learned author in assuming that 
 the latter word is a derivative from an Arabic root which 
 means ' support ' ; for though that occurs as one of the 
 meanings of the root, it is not its ordinary meaning, and 
 the derivative has quite a different signification both in 
 Arabic and Persian. Moreover, the word does not occur 
 in the Ayeen Akbery, nor does it appear to be naturalised 
 in the Hindoostanee language. 1 I am, therefore, inclined 
 to think that it is rather a misprint or misreading of the 
 Tartar word yetool, which we have already met with as a 
 synonym for Jageer. The Foujdarees were military govern- 
 ments for the purpose of guarding the frontier provinces of 
 the empire, and had been abolished, or mixed up with the 
 greater Zemindaries at the time of the transfer of the 
 general government of Bengal to the East India Com- 
 pany. They may therefore be left out of consideration, 
 together with the Khalsa Shereefa, as having no bearing 
 on the tenure of land, and our attention is thus confined 
 to what may be called the Jaghire proper ; that is the 
 assignments to the lesser officers, originally termed Yetool, 
 though subsequently known under the former name. 
 Meaning "The word Jaghire, or more correctly Jageer, is a com- 
 of Jaghire. p OUI1( j o f two Persian words, ja (place) and geer (con- 
 traction of geerindah, taker), the compound being thus 
 properly a participle, signifying 6 place taker,' though it 
 is commonly used as a substantitive noun, the word dar, 
 or holder, being added, to signify the person who holds 
 the jageer, as jageerdar. The word necessarily implies a 
 holding in some sense of a particular place ; for, as the 
 object of the grant was the maintenance of a certain 
 number of troops, it was necessary that the person who 
 undertook to maintain them should have such a command 
 over the place from which the revenue for their mainte- 
 
 1 It is not found in the dictionaries. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. xlvii 
 
 nance was to be derived, as to enable him to enforce the 
 payment of the revenue by the persons who were liable 
 for it. The Jageerdar was thus, in a manner, ' substi- 
 tuted exactly in the place of the government,' and ac- 
 quired c immediately and during the legal continuance of 
 his grant all the jurisdictions, rights and prerogatives 
 belonging to the sovereign.' l But this was only 'when a 
 whole district was made over to him,' so as to entitle 
 him ' to the full yearly crown-rent.' When, on the other 
 hand, only ' a stated amount of money is assigned (in 
 daums or rupees) issuing partially from territorial re- 
 sources of revenue, then the Jageerdar is restricted 
 entirely to the emoluments of his pecuniary income, and 
 can have no local influence whatever, in consequence, ' within 
 the limits of his grant.' 2 He had thus no direct means 
 of vindicating his right to the allowance granted to him, 
 and his grant accordingly contained a requisition to the 
 officials and ryots of the district on which it was assigned 
 to account to him for the rents and dues to the full 
 amount of the assignment. The Jaghires referred to in 
 Eegulation XIII. of 1830, and Act XIII. of 1842 of the 
 Bombay Code, seem to have been of the first description. 
 So also the Jageer of the late Begum Sumroo in Sird- 
 hanah. And in No. IV. of the Appendix we have a 
 Perwanneh addressed to the agent of a Jageerdar ap- 
 parently of the same kind, requiring him to do justice 
 to a complaint, as if there was no doubt of his having 
 the power to do so. Jageers of this description being 
 burdened with services to be rendered, were called 
 mushroot or shurtee (conditional) ; while those of the 
 other kind, being entirely gratuitous, or in recompense 
 for services already performed, were termed bila shurt, 
 or without condition. Accordingly, Lord Olive's Jaghire 
 of 222,958 rupees on the 24 Pergunnahs, which was of 
 that description, was expressly said to be unconditional ; 
 and it contained a requisition to the East India Company, 
 as Zemindars of the district, ' to pay their rents to Lord 
 
 1 Ap. F. R. p. 408. 2 Ibid. 
 
Xlviii INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 Clive as Jaghirdar, in like manner as they were 
 before bound to do to the established Government.' Nos. 
 IT. and III. of the Appendix may also be cited as ex- 
 amples of unconditional jageers, and they both contain 
 requisitions of the like kind to the officials and ryots of 
 the districts to account for the rents up to the full 
 amounts granted to the quasi jageerdars. 
 
 Seyurghal. Under the head of assigned lands were also included 
 alienations known by the name of Seyurghal^ which had 
 increased to a very considerable extent previously to the 
 time of Akbar. The word is of Tartar origin, and 
 the persons in whose favour grants under that name were 
 made are described in the Ayeen Akbery as being divided 
 into four classes : 1st, the learned and their scholars ; 
 2nd, those who had bid adieu to the world ; 3rd, the 
 needy who are not able to help themselves ; 4th, the 
 descendants of great families, who, from a sense of false 
 shame, will not submit to follow any occupation for their 
 support. The allowances to these persons were sometimes 
 in the form of Tunkhas, or assignments on the revenue of 
 particular localities, and sometimes in the form of grants 
 of land, which were called milk and mudd-al-masli ; 2 
 terms, the former of which signifies property* and the 
 latter c prolonging of life.' The Tunkhas were essentially 
 unconditional Jageers, and therefore necessarily limited 
 to the lives of the grantees. The same may be said of 
 the revenue derivable from the lands ; and though grants 
 of lands are hereditary in their own nature, yet being gifts 
 they are revokable by Mohammedan law at any time during 
 the life of the grantee, and might thus be considered 
 temporary, in the same way as the revenues derived from 
 them. Wherever the grant was not revoked, it would pass 
 at the death of the grantee to his heirs. And thus we 
 find, in the Ayeen Akbery, reference to some grants of 
 Seyurghal that were treated as hereditary. For the 
 better regulation of Seyurghal grants, a rule was estab- 
 
 1 Erroneously written Sycurghal in Ap. F. R. p. 639. 
 2 Ay. Aid. vol. i. p. 128. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. xlix 
 
 lished 1 that where the grant was of land the land was to be 
 half arable, and the other half capable of being brought 
 into cultivation ; a rule, of which two examples will be 
 found in Nos. V. and VI. of the Appendix. Where, again, 
 the grant was in the form of an assignment over land, the 
 whole of which was arable, a fourth part of the revenue 
 was to be deducted, and a Tunkha issued for only three- 
 fourths. 2 
 
 Besides the Jageer and Seyurghal, there is mention in Melkeyut. 
 the Ayeen Akbery of another grant called Melkeyut. It 
 occurs in the enumeration of certain purposes for which 
 the Firman Subtee was used. Eight great offices are 
 mentioned for appointments to which that Firman was 
 issued, and then we have these words : i also for the grant 
 of a jageer Sir or tun ; for confirming the salaries of 
 officers in conquered territories ; for granting a Melkeyut ; 
 for a grant Seyurghal.' The Firman Subtee required 
 the seal of the sovereign, as well as the signatures of his 
 ministers. There were two seals in use in Akbar's time, 
 one small and the other large. ' The small one, which is 
 called ouzek, is used for stamping of firmans, and the 
 larger one, on which are also engraven the names of His 
 Majesty's predecessors, is used for letters to foreign princes.' 3 
 It must have been the ouzek, then, that was attached to 
 all grants of jageer, melkeyut, and seyurghal. The only 
 other mention of melkeyut that I have met with is in the 
 following extract from Mr. Ofladwin's history of Jehangir, 
 (p. 100) : c The Emperors his predecessors (he says), 
 whenever they bestowed a jageer in melkyet or perpetuity, 
 were used to affix to the patent a red seal, from whence 
 such a grant was called Altumgha. Jehangier directed Altumgha. 
 that, instead of red ink, the impression should be taken 
 in gold leaf, whence it was afterwards called Altoon 
 Tumgha.' From the above account of Akbar's seals, there 
 can be little doubt that the Altumgha was only the ouzek 
 used with red ink ; as, indeed, Mr. Grladwin himself says in 
 another place (p. 1 3), ' the ouzek is affixed to all 
 
 1 Ay. AH. vol. i. pp. 283-4. 2 Hid. 3 Hid. p. 67. 
 
 d 
 
1 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 firmans.' If Mr. Grladwin's account of the Altumgha be 
 correct, then it would seem that a Jageer, which was only 
 a temporary grant of revenue, and could not be lawfully 
 extended beyond the life of the grantee, might, by a mere 
 change of the colour of a seal, be converted into an estate 
 of inheritance. But Mr. Grladwin's rendering of the word 
 melkeyet (or more properly milkiyut) by ' perpetuity ' is 
 not correct ; for the only meanings given of the word in 
 Johnson's Arabic and Persian Dictionary, and in Shake- 
 spear's Hindustanee Dictionary, are 6 property, possession, 
 use, right.' And if the expression jageer in melkeyet is to 
 be found in any native writer, it can only be understood 
 as meaning a grant in property, that is, a grant of the 
 property or land from which the jageer or right to revenue 
 is derived. In this sense the grant of a jageer might, 
 perhaps, with some looseness of expression, be said to be 
 in perpetuity, and this is probably all that Mr. Gladwin 
 really meant ; for the owner of the land would be left 
 to appropriate the revenue to himself, and the same 
 liberty be continued to his heirs, so long as they were not 
 called upon to account for it by the successors of the 
 grantor. That this is all that could be assured to the 
 grantee, or, indeed, was ever pretended to be bestowed by 
 grants in Altumgha, is, I think, made clear by the two 
 Two ex- following examples of Altumgha grants by the Emperor, 
 Shah Alum, to the East India Company. The first is of 
 the Dewanny of the Province of Bengal, dated 12th 
 August 1765, which after stating, c We have granted them, 
 as a free gift and Ultumgau, the office of the Dewanny of 
 the Khalsa Shereefa of the Province of Bengal,' proceeds 
 as follows : ' It is requisite that our royal descendants, 
 the viziers, the bestowers of dignity, the Omrahs high in 
 rank,' &c,, * as well the future as the present, using their 
 constant endeavours for the establishment of this our 
 Eoyal command, leave the said office in possession of the 
 said Company from generation to generation, for ever and 
 ever.' The other is a firman confirming the grants of 
 Burdwan and the rest of the Company's possessions in 
 Bengal, bearing the same date of the 12th August, 1765. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 11 
 
 After reciting the original grants to the said Company in 
 the time of Meer Mahomed Kassim and Meer Mahomed 
 Jaffier Khan deceased, it proceeds : ' We, in consideration 
 of the attachment of the said Company, have been 
 graciously pleased to confirm to them, as a free gift and 
 ultumgau, without the association of any other.' Then 
 follows the request to 'our royal descendants,' &c., 
 exactly in the same terms as the last firman. Now, if the 
 Altumgha grant conferred in itself a hereditary right, 
 there would have been no occasion for these special 
 clauses. But as Shah Alum had no power to bind his 
 successors to a perpetual alienation of the Khiraj or land 
 revenue, which was contrary to the Mohammedan law, an 
 appeal to their forbearance became necessary to give even 
 the semblance of perpetuity to his grants, so far as the 
 revenue was concerned, though, with regard to the land, 
 the right of resumption might, as already mentioned, be 
 barred by the death of the original grantees. 
 
 III. Having brought the different interests in the land Tenures of 
 or its produce down to the acquisition of the Lower Pro- 1 ?; nd D u " < ? e 1 r 
 
 \ ._, ... ~ the British 
 
 vinces by the East India Company, we have now to enquire Govern- 
 how far these interests were affected by the perpetual ment - 
 settlement of the revenue in those Provinces, which took 
 place in 1793 under the administration of Lord Cornwallis. 
 The Government having determined to commute its 
 share in the produce of the land into payments of money 
 to be fixed in perpetuity, it was thought desirable that 
 the settlement should be made with the proprietors of the 
 land, whoever they might happen to be. I have offered 
 some reasons for inferring that the Khoodkasht ryots, as 
 representing the original holders of Wuzeefa land, had 
 the best title to be considered the owners of so much of 
 the land as may have been brought under the system of 
 Akbar. But their proprietary rights were entirely ignored 
 by the two rival authorities of the period Mr. -Shore, 
 afterwards Lord Teignmouth, and Mr. James Grant. By 
 the former the Zemindars and certain Talookdars who paid 
 their revenue direct to the Government, were deemed to 
 
 d 2 
 
Hi 
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 Perpetual 
 settlement 
 of revenue 
 in the 
 Lower 
 Provinces 
 with Zem- 
 indars and 
 Talook- 
 dars as 
 proprietors 
 of the soil. 
 
 Indepen- 
 dent and 
 dependent, 
 or Poftah, 
 Talook- 
 dars. 
 
 be the proprietors; 1 while Mr. Grant considered the 
 Government itself to be the proprietor, and the Zemindars 
 only its officers. Yet, at the same time, it seems to have 
 been generally allowed that the Khoodkasht ryots had 
 some sort of hereditary ' privilege of holding possession of 
 the spots of land which they cultivate so long as they pay the 
 revenue assessed upon them.' 2 But Mr. Shore supposed 
 this privilege, or right of occupancy as he termed it, to 
 have been acquired by long possession under pottahs 
 granted by the Zemindars. 3 The difference between the 
 Khoodkasht ryots and the paekasht ryots he supposed to 
 have arisen from a difference in their pottahs ; those to 
 the latter containing a limitation of time, 4 while the 
 pottahs to the former were indefinite in that respect. 
 
 The views of Mr. Shore seem to have influenced the 
 measures of Lord Cornwallis, and a settlement of the 
 revenue for ten years was made with the Zemindars and 
 certain Talookdars, as the actual proprietors of the soil. 
 The settlement was afterwards made perpetual, though 
 contrary to the opinion of Mr. Shore, and the rules under 
 which it had been concluded were re-enacted in Regulation 
 VIII. of 1793. Chowdries are also mentioned in that 
 Eegulation as a denomination of proprietors, but the 
 name does not occur again in the Regulation, and as it 
 has now dropped out of use, they may be left out of 
 consideration. If there were any Talookdars at that time 
 whose revenue was paid direct to the Government, as stated 
 by Mr. Shore, they were not distinguished from the Zem- 
 indars, from whom, indeed, they would differ only in 
 name. But there were other Talookdars whose revenue 
 was paid through the Zemindars. Of these there were 
 two classes, called Independent and Dependent. The 
 Independent were those ' who had purchased their lands 
 or obtained them by gift, and had received deeds of sale 
 or gift of such lands, or sunnuds from the Khalsa, making 
 over the proprietary rights to them.' These were allowed 
 
 1 Ap. F. E. p. 205. 
 
 2 Minute by Lord Cormvallis, Ap. F. E. p. 487. 
 
 3 Ibid. p. 206. 4 Ibid. p. 207. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. liii 
 
 to settle for their lands directly with the Government. 
 The Dependant Zemindars, on the other hand, were sup- 
 posed to hold their Talooks under writings or sunnuds 
 which did not expressly transfer the property in the soil, 
 but only entitled ' the Talookdar to possession so long as 
 he continued to discharge the rent or perform the conditions 
 stipulated therein,' and they c were considered as lease- 
 holders only, not actual proprietors of the soil.' They, 
 therefore, were not to be separated from the Zemindar, or 
 other actual proprietor from whom they derived their 
 tenures, and through whom they paid their revenue to 
 Government. The writings last referred to are called 
 pottahs, and, though they are here and elsewhere in the dest ' ribed - 
 Regulations treated as leases, yet they do not represent 
 any particular transaction, and therefore admit of being 
 restricted to terms of years, or enlarged into estates of 
 inheritance, according to the phraseology employed. Of 
 the last description of pottahs are the pottahs to Talook- 
 dars, 'whose tenure is denominated JunglebooreeJ and who jangle- 
 were not considered entitled to separation from the pro- f ' ooree 
 
 tenures. 
 
 prietors of whom they held. ' The pottahs granted to 
 these Talookdars, in consideration of the grantee clearing 
 away the jungle and bringing the land into a productive 
 state, give it to him and his heirs in perpetuity, exempting 
 him from payment of revenue for a certain term, and at the 
 expiration of it subjecting him to a certain specific asul 
 jumma for such part of the land only as the grantee 
 brings into a state of cultivation.' ' The pottah specifies 
 the boundaries of the land granted, but not the quantity 
 of land until it is brought into cultivation.' 
 
 Under the category of Independent Talooks were in- MaJgoo- 
 cluded tenures called Malgoozary Aymas. Ayma, or more zar v 
 correctly Aimma, is the plural of the word Imam, which 
 is applied to. the leader at the devotions of an assembly of 
 private worshippers, as well as to the head of the Mo- 
 hammedan community. Ayma tenures were grants of 
 land to Imams by Mohammedan sovereigns, and were 
 sometimes entirely free from the payment of revenue, 
 but sometimes subject to a fixed rent. The former 
 
liv 
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 Value of 
 proprie- 
 tary rights 
 in the soil 
 according 
 to the Go- 
 vernment 
 estimate. 
 
 were included in the Seyurghal already mentioned, and 
 will meet us again when we come to the La Khiraj tenures ; 
 the latter were the Malgoozary Aymas just mentioned. 
 These were to be separated from the proprietors to whom 
 their revenue was paid, as coming under the rules for the 
 separation of Talookdars, who are the proprietors of the 
 lands comprising their Talooks. Malgoozary Ayma 
 tenures were, however, sometimes granted for the purpose 
 of bringing waste lands into cultivation ; and these were 
 classed with Dependent Talooks, as coming within the rules 
 respecting the Junglebooree Talooks, already mentioned. 
 Some other tenures are mentioned in the Eegulation in 
 connection with the settlement of the revenue, but any 
 further notice of these would be superfluous in this place. 
 
 After the settlement of the revenue was concluded with 
 the Independent Talookdars, there would no longer be any 
 occasion for the distinction between Dependent and Inde- 
 pendent Talookdars, for the latter would become, in fact, 
 Zemindars, and the subordinate condition of the former 
 would be sufficiently indicated by the name Talookdar, 
 which means literally the holder of a dependency. 
 
 Though the Zemindars and Independent Talookdars 
 were dealt with for the purposes of the settlement as the 
 actual proprietors of the soil, it does not appear, from the 
 terms that were granted to them, that the Grovernment 
 of the time entertained any very exalted ideas of their 
 proprietary rights. 
 
 Previous to the Decennial settlement, settlements for 
 shorter periods had been made in many instances with the 
 Zemindars, and in fixing the new assessment, thejumma of 
 the preceding year was taken with some modifications as 
 the standard. But that standard ' could not be applied 
 to the separated Talooks which had not theretofore paid 
 any jumma immediately to the Grovernment' ; nor was it 
 understood to be applicable ' to any instances where the 
 actual produce of the land had been ascertained.' In all 
 such instances the assessment was to be regulated so as 
 to leave to the proprietors a provision for themselves and 
 families equal to about ten per cent, on the amount of their 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. lv 
 
 contributions to Government, including the produce of 
 their nankar or other private lands to be annexed to the 
 Malgoozary lands.' Ten per cent, on the contributions 
 is one-eleventh of the whole amount contributed, and if 
 we can ascertain the relation of the amount to the whole 
 produce of the land, we shall have some measure of the 
 value put on the Zemindar's proprietary rights. Accord- 
 ing to the Mohammedan law, a half of the produce of the 
 land was the extreme limit of what could properly be taken 
 from the cultivator, and that was believed by Mr. Shore 
 to be the actual proportion in which the ryots were taxed 
 in Bengal, 1 so that one-twenty-second part of the whole 
 produce of the land was about the estimate of the value 
 of the proprietary rights of the Zemindar, put upon them 
 by the Government at the time of the perpetual settlement 
 of the revenue in Bengal; rather a slender foundation, it 
 must be allowed, for the superstructure of subsidiary rights 
 that was supposed to rest upon it. 
 
 The Zemindars and other landholders were supposed Powers 
 
 ., . j . (. over the 
 
 to have the power ot summoning, and if necessary, com- ryots pos . 
 
 pelling the attendance of their tenants, for the adjust- 
 ment of their rents, or for any other just purpose, and of f er red in 
 measuring any land within their respective estates which 
 may be liable to measurement. 2 So also they were held other 
 to be entitled to the unoccupied or waste land within assun y d 
 
 1 t propne- 
 
 their Zemindaries ; for jungle, boorie pottahs granted by tors. 
 them in consideration of the grantees' clearing away the 
 jungle and bringing the land into a productive estate 
 were recognised as valid, and quite within their power to 
 grant. Now, the power to measure the land was a sove- 
 reign right, exercised, as we have seen, by Ala-ood-deen, 
 and on a larger scale by Akbar, and repeated by his suc- 
 cessors on three several occasions in Bengal, when addi- 
 tions were made to the Asul Toomar jummah. So also 
 it was the sovereign, as representative of the Imam, who 
 had the sole right to authorise the cultivation and appro- 
 
 1 Ap. F. R. p. 184. 
 
 2 See Reg. vii. of 1799, 13, cl. 8, where the powers are 
 confirmed. 
 
Ivi INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 priation of wastes. It seems, therefore, probable that if 
 the rights referred to were possessed by the Zemindars at 
 the time of the perpetual settlement of the revenue, it 
 was not by virtue of any proprietary rights of their own, 
 but as Amils or collectors of ^the public revenue, under 
 the Sunnuds, which directed them among other things 
 6 to encourage the body of ryots in such a manner that 
 signs of an increased cultivation and improvement of the 
 country may duly appear.' Be that as it may, these 
 powers were supposed to be possessed by the Zemindars 
 and independent Talookdars, and an important addition 
 was made to them by another Eegulation passed at the 
 same time, 1 which empowered ' the Zemindars, Indepen- 
 dent Talookdars, and other actual proprietors of land, to 
 distrain the crops and products of the earth of every de- 
 scription, the grown cattle and all other personal property 
 belonging to their under-farmers and ryots, for arrears of 
 rent and revenue, and to cause the said property to be sold 
 for the discharge of such arrears.' It is of importance to 
 observe that the same power of distress was vested in 
 Dependent Talookdars for the recovery of the arrears of 
 rent from their under-farmers and ryots ; and as the other 
 powers of compelling the attendance of ryots, and of 
 measuring the land, were assumed to belong not only to 
 the Zemindars but to * other landholders,' a term which 
 would comprehend the Dependent Talookdars, it would 
 seem to have been the intention of Government to place 
 them in all respects in the same relative position to the 
 ryots as the Zemindars were in to themselves. 
 
 Effect of . The effect, then, of the permanent settlement on the 
 
 ment e on e " condition of the Zemindars and ryots, was to raise the 
 
 the condi- former from the condition of Amils or collectors of the 
 
 Zemindars public revenue, and to establish them permanently as 
 
 and ryots, proprietors of the land, between the Government and the 
 
 Khoodkasht ryots, while it reduced the latter from the 
 
 condition of proprietors, or at least tenants in chief of the 
 
 sovereign, which their predecessors the Wuzeefa holders 
 
 1 R. xvii. of 1798, 2. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Ivil 
 
 are shown to have been under Akbar and Aurungzebe, to 
 that of tenants of the Zemindars ; and not only so, but 
 also in some cases to establish permanently, between the 
 Zemindars and ryots, a class of sub-proprietors under the 
 name of Talookdars. It seems to have been the original 
 intention of the Government that this class of sub-pro- 
 prietors should not be allowed to increase, for the Zemin- 
 dars were prevented from creating any more tenures of 
 that kind, by restricting their power of granting leases to 
 ten years. But that restriction was removed by Eegula- 
 tion V. of 1812, and by a subsequent Regulation (VII. of 
 1819) they were not only empowered to multiply talooks 
 indefinitely, but the -same power was committed to the 
 Talookdars of creating similar tenures to hold of them- 
 selves. So that we have now not only Putny Talookdars, Putny 
 as the first are called, holding of the Zemindars, but 
 dur-putny dars, holding similarly of the putny dars, 
 and se-putny dars, holding in the same manner of the 
 dur-putny dars ; with a tendency to a further extension 
 downwards, and also laterally, through all the Zillahs of 
 Bengal. 1 
 
 It was foreseen that the large powers assumed to be 
 possessed by the Zemindars and Talookdars, or now con- 
 ferred on them, might be abused to the detriment of the 
 ryots, and certain provisions were made for their protec- 
 tion. With regard to some part of the lands, the custom 
 prevailed of varying the rents as the Khiraj was origin- 
 ally varied, according to the different kinds of produce. 
 In other places the whole had been converted into one 
 lump sum called the Asul, or original of the Toomar 
 jummah. This had been raised on three different occasions 
 in Bengal, as already mentioned, and subsequently to the 
 last of these, various additions had been made to it by 
 the local Governments or by the Zemindars under the 
 name of Abwab. Some of these Abwab were added to 
 the Asul, but the power of making any further exactions 
 of the same kind was expressly taken away from the 
 
 1 Preamble to last Regulation. 
 
Iviii INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 Zemindars. All that could be done with regard to the 
 other lands, was to refer them to the nirikh-bundee, or 
 supposed custom of the Pergunnah ; and as no means were 
 ever taken to ascertain what the nirikh was, the ryots 
 were left very much at the mercy of the Zemindars, and 
 became thus ultimately reduced to a condition not far 
 removed from that of tenants at will. 
 
 La KUraj IV. I have already shown that all appropriations of the 
 tenures. Khiraj, or land revenue, extending beyond the life of the 
 grantee, were absolutely void by the Mohammedan law. 1 
 But the British Grovernment in its liberality, determined 
 that ' all grants for holding land exempt from the pay- 
 ment of revenue made previous to the Company's acces- 
 sion to the Dewanny, by whatever authority, and whether 
 by a writing or without a writing, should be deemed valid, 
 provided the grantee actually and bond fide obtained pos- 
 session of the land so granted previous to the date above 
 mentioned.' The only authority by which such grants 
 could have been lawfully made was the Badshah, or king ; 
 but ' numerous grants of this description were made, 
 not only by the Zemindars, but by the officers of Grovern- 
 ment appointed to the temporary superintendence of the 
 collection of the revenue, under the pretext that the pro- 
 duce of the land was to be applied to religious or chari- 
 Divided table purposes.' Grants emanating from the sovereign 
 
 into Bad- were termed ' Badshahee,' the others ' not Badshahee '; 
 shahee,and . . . ., , ., , . , 
 
 non-Bad- and provisions were made for both kinds of grants sepa- 
 shanee. rately by Eegulations XIX. and XXXVII. of . 1793. In both 
 of these the provision before mentioned was contained ; and 
 it was also declared in both that all grants of either kind 
 for holding lands exempt from the payment of revenue 
 that might have been made since the 12th of August, 
 1765, by any other authority than that of Grovernment, 
 and which might not have been confirmed by Grovern- 
 ment, or any officer authorised to confirm them, were 
 invalid. There was no power to make Badshahee 
 
 1 See ante, p. xxiv. ; and Ap. F. R. p. 318. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. lix 
 
 grants in the Lower Provinces after that date ; but the 
 manufacture of the non-Badshahee seems to have gone 
 on as before, and a distinction was therefore drawn be- 
 tween such of them, on the one hand, as had been made 
 between the 12th of August, 1765, and the 1st of Decem- 
 ber, 1790; and those of them, on the other, that were 
 made subsequent to the latter date. The former were 
 only to be invalid as regards the Government revenue, and 
 no more than half the usual revenue was to be assessed 
 upon them ; while, with regard to the latter, they were 
 declared to be null and void, and no length of possession 
 was to give validity to such grants, ' either with regard to 
 the property in the soil or the rents of it.' 
 
 Though all grants on which possession had been ob- 
 tained before the 1st of August, 1765, were declared to be 
 valid for the life of the original grantee, no grant of either 
 description was to exempt the lands from revenue after 
 his death, where the grant expressly specified it to have 
 been given for the life of the grantee ; or, supposing that 
 there was no writing, or the writing for the grant did not 
 specify whether it was to be considered hereditary or 
 otherwise, when the grant, from the nature or denomina- 
 tion of it, should be proved to be 'a life tenure only,' 
 6 according to the ancient usages of the country.' Where, 
 again, there was no such evidence of a life tenure, then 
 a distinction was made between the Badshahee and non- 
 Badshahee grants. The former, with the exception of the 
 Jaghire, were assumed to be hereditary unless proved to 
 be the contrary; while the latter were not to be con- 
 sidered hereditary unless proved to be so from their na- 
 ture and denomination, according to the ancient usages of 
 the country. 1 
 
 In both Eegulations it will be seen that exemption 
 from revenue is sometimes treated as a personal right, 
 limited to the life of the grantee, and sometimes as a 
 quality adhering to the land, and capable of being here- 
 ditary. This is not agreeable to Mohammedan law, ac- 
 
 1 Reg. xix. and xxxvii. of 1793, 2, cl. 4 of both. 
 
IX INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 cording to which all land that is not Ooshree is KTiirajee 
 and even when the owner is excused from the payment of 
 the Khiraj, the land cannot be said to be exempted from 
 it ; for its character as Khirajee still remains, though the 
 owner is temporarily allowed to appropriate the Khiraj 
 to himself. 
 
 y on . Of non-Badshahee grants, the following are, I think, 
 
 Sad *to** generally allowed to be by their nature and denomination 
 La Khiraj, and hereditary according to the usages of the 
 country: 1st. Bermooter or land granted to Brahmins for 
 the support of themselves and descendants. 2nd. Bishn- 
 pareet, or land granted to religious persons professing the 
 special service of the Deity Vishnu. 3rd. Deotur, or land 
 granted for the support of a temple or idol. 4th. Mohu- 
 teran, or land assigned generally to religious persons, or 
 for religious purposes. 5th. Bustomitter, or land granted 
 to Bustoms, or Hindoo religious mendicants ; and 6th. 
 Fakeeran, or lands granted to Fakeers, or Mohammedan 
 religious mendicants. All these, it will be seen, are for 
 religious or charitable uses, and are at the present time 
 included in the accounts of the Bengal Zemindars, under 
 the head of Mujara-een, or lands that have been assigned 
 away as an allowance, and which consequently do not pay 
 revenue.' * 
 
 Eadshahee With regard to Badshahee grants, the following are 
 grants. mentioned in Eegulation XXXVII. of 1793, 2, namely, 
 Altumgah, Jaghire, Ayma, and Mududmash; and they 
 are all described as ' Grants for holding lands exempt 
 from the payment of revenue.' By a subsequent section 
 it is declared that 'Altumgah, Ayma, and Mududmash 
 Jaghire. grants are to be considered hereditary,' but Jaghires are 
 to be considered as life tenures, and, with all other 
 life tenures, are to expire with the life of the grantee, 
 unless otherwise expressed in the grant. From this 
 it would appear that, in the view of the framers of the 
 Eegulation the Jaghire was, like the other Badshahee 
 grants, a tenure of land, and differed from them only that, 
 
 1 Smith's Zwneendaree Accounts, passim. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Ixi 
 
 while the others were hereditary, the Jaghire was usually 
 for life, though it might also be made hereditary by words 
 to that effect in the grant. That this is not a correct de- 
 scription of the Jaghire may, I think, be inferred from 
 what has been said of the origin and progress of that kind 
 of grant. But to make the matter more clear, let us 
 revert a little more particularly to the examples of un- 
 conditional Jaghires that have been already referred to in 
 this essay, namely the Jaghire to Lord Clive, and the 
 forms Nos. II. and III. in the Appendix. For the better 
 understanding of the first it is to be observed that the 
 Zemindary of Calcutta, or the 24 Pergunnahs, had been 
 previously granted to. the East India Company, subject to 
 an annual payment of sicca rupees 222,958, to the Eoyal 
 treasury, and that the dignity of a Munsubdar of the 
 Empire had been conferred on Lord Clive. To support 
 that dignity a Jaghire of the above sum was appointed to 
 him, without any limitation in respect of time ; so that* 
 it would remain to him for his life. It was afterwards 
 restricted to ten years, with a grant of the reversion to 
 the East India Company by a firman reciting that the 
 sum of sicca rupees 222,958 and odd had 'been appro- 
 priated from the aforesaid payments as an unconditional 
 Jaghire to the high and mighty Lord Clive,' and then 
 declaring that the same ' are confirmed,' and c shall apper- 
 tain as an unconditional Jaghire to the high and mighty 
 aforesaid ' for ten years from a date mentioned, after 
 which ' they shall revert as an unconditional Jaghire to the 
 Company.' The other two forms above referred to are to 
 the same effect. In both of them a sum of money, so 
 many lakhs of daums, is said to be bestowed on a parti- 
 cular individual out of the revenues of a specified Per- 
 gunnah, by way of Jageer, and, like the Jaghire to Lord 
 Clive, both the forms contain a requisition to the persons 
 by whom the revenue is payable, to account for it to the 
 Jageerdar. Without something of this kind, which is 
 equivalent to the appointment of him as an agent, it is 
 difficult to conceive how the Jageer could be made avail- 
 able in any way known to the Mohammedan law. As a 
 
Ixii 
 
 INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 debt due, or to become due, it could not in strictness be 
 the subject of a gift to any but the debtor. When given 
 to him, being an extinction of the debt, it might without 
 much impropriety be said to be granted in perpetuity, as 
 in the case of the reversion of Lord Olive's Jageer to the 
 East India Company, who were debtors in that amount to 
 the Mogul Government. But in the case of any other 
 person than the debtor, the only way in which a debt 
 could be transferred was by making the transferee the 
 agent of the original creditor; 1 or, what is the same 
 thing, requiring the debtor to pay it to him. But an 
 appointment of agency does not pass at the death of the 
 agent to his heir, but is ipso facto cancelled. 2 So that it 
 is difficult to imagine how a Jaghire, in the strict and 
 proper sense of the term, could be made hereditary. In- 
 deed, so established had its character as a life estate 
 become in the usages of the country, that in a case 
 decided in the Sudder Dewany Adaulut of Calcutta 
 (Eeports, Vol. II. p. 191 ), it was held to be a good ground, 
 among others, for suspecting the genuineness of a Sunnud 
 granting a Jaghire, that it contained a condition that it 
 should be hereditary. 
 
 Altumgha. Of the Altumgha I have already said enough, and will 
 only observe in this place that the grant mentioned under 
 that name in the Eegulation, which is said to be here- 
 ditary in its own nature, is not a grant of revenue, but 
 a grant of land exempt from the payment of revenue. 
 Though we sometimes hear of an Altumgha Jageer, I 
 think it will always be found to mean a grant of land 
 exempt from the payment of revenue. It is true that the 
 Altumgha grant of the Dewany to the East India Com- 
 pany, which was in reality a Jaghire, was intended to be 
 perpetual ; yet it could only become so, as already ob- 
 served, by the sufferance of the grantor's royal successors ; 
 and accordingly we find that the firman contained a 
 request to them to ' leave the said office in the possession 
 
 1 Digest, p. 522. 2 Hidayah, vol. iv. p. 231. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Mil 
 
 + 
 
 of the said Company from generation to generation for 
 ever.' 
 
 With regard to the remaining Badshahee grants men- 
 tioned in the Eegulation, enough has been said of the 
 Ayma when speaking of Malgoozary Aymas ; but a few 
 words are required in elucidation of the mudud-mash, 
 on account of the words ; and posterity,' which are found 
 in one of the examples (No. I.) in the Appendix ; the 
 original being furzundan or children ; a word which Meaning 
 frequently occurs in modern deeds, and even in deeds by of tl 
 Hindoos, though it is one of the Mohammedan law. children 
 Mudud means assistance, and the grant is essentiallv the (& u * z ? n ~ 
 
 J dan) in the 
 
 same as that mentioned in the Ayeen Akbery, and before latter 
 referred to under the name of mudd-ul-mash. In Eng- grant ' 
 lish law a distinction is made between the transfer of 
 personal property and the transfer of real property, and a 
 sale or gift of the latter can be effected only by a writing, 
 which expresses that it is made to the purchaser or donee 
 ' and his heirs ' ; as without the latter words an estate for 
 life only would be conveyed to him. No such distinctions 
 exist in the Mohammedan law. Sale or gift of real as of 
 personal property may be made verbally ; and in either 
 case there is a complete transfer of the whole estate of 
 the seller or donor to the purchaser or donee. The Bei- 
 nameh (deed of sale), heba nameh (deed of gift), or 
 tumleek nameh, applicable to both, is only evidence of 
 the transaction ; and the addition of the words ' and 
 heirs,' or the like, when they have any meaning at all, is 
 to restrict rather than to enlarge the estate conveyed. 
 The words ' and heirs' would be entirely nugatory, as no 
 living person can have heirs, these being indeterminable 
 till his death. But if the words were ' and children,' and 
 there were any persons at the time in existence to whom 
 the words could be properly applied, the sale or gift 
 would be to the purchaser or donee and his children 
 jointly. It could not be to them after him, for that 
 would reduce his estate to one for life, which would be in- 
 consistent with the nature of sale or gift ; and, in order 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 to give the words any meaning at all they must be taken 
 to convey a joint estate, in the same way as if any other 
 person than his children' were conjoined with him. If 
 there were no persons answering to the description of his 
 children in existence at the time, the words would be 
 nugatory, and the sale or gift would be to the purchaser 
 or donee alone. But the word furzundan is not restricted 
 to children of the loins. It has a technical meaning, 
 which it is now necessary to explain. In the first place 
 it means children of the loins without any distinction of 
 sex. In the next generation it comprehends the children 
 of sons in the same way without distinction of sex, and 
 so on in the following generations, females being included 
 in each, but their children excluded in the next. So 
 long as there are children in any generation the next is 
 excluded. So that a mudud-mash grant to a man and 
 his children, is to him and the sons and daughters of his 
 loins if there are any living at the time ; if there are none, 
 then it is to him and the sons and daughters of his sons 
 if there be any, and so on. While, if there are none to 
 whom the name of children can be properly applied, the 
 grant is to him alone. It will be observed that children 
 unborn are in no case included, and to give them any 
 interest in the produce of an estate it is necessary to 
 throw it into wukf or settlement. A gift being in its 
 nature absolute, or what is called in English law a fee 
 simple, any restriction of its enjoyment or of the power 
 to alienate it would be void as being inconsistent with its 
 essential character. So that a thing cannot be given for 
 life. 1 Its produce, however, may be reserved for succes- 
 sive generations when the thing itself is put into wukf 
 or settlement. In these circumstances the same construc- 
 tion is I think to be put on the word children (furzun- 
 dan) as that above assigned to it, though it has become 
 usual, for more certainty perhaps, to add after the word 
 furzundan, the phrase butnun baad butn, or generation 
 after generation, and sometimes (indeed commonly) with 
 
 1 Digest, p. 509. 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. xV 
 
 the further addition of nuslun baad nusl. Butn means 
 literally venter, and the first expression does no more than 
 serve simply to convey the idea that the generations, if 
 more than one, are not to be taken pari passu, but in 
 succession. Nusl, however, has a precise meaning of its 
 own, which may enlarge the meaning of furzundan when 
 added to it ; for if one should make a settlement on his 
 nusl, the children of his eons and the children of his 
 daughters would be included whether near or remote. 1 
 
 Nearly allied to the Lakhiraj tenures is another tenure Ghatwallee 
 called Ghatwallee, which, though perhaps older and more 
 genuine than many of them, has not been fully brought 
 to light till our own times. The word Ghatwallee is a 
 compound of Ghat, a pass or ferry, wallah, a keeper, and 
 ee, a relative particle, so that the whole word means 
 literally, something relating to a Ghat-keeper, the person 
 being the principal object of consideration, as in all cases 
 of the application of the Khiraj. ' Securing the passes ' 
 is expressly included among the purposes to which 
 the Khiraj may be applied, and a Ghatwallah is thus 
 strictly one of the Ahl Khiraj. The practice of ap- 
 pointing special persons to guard the passes seems to have 
 originated in Beerbhoom, which is described by Mr. 
 James Grant * as ' the largest Mussulman Zemindary in 
 Bengal,' and as having been ' conferred by Jaffier Khan on 
 Assid Ullah, of the Afghan or Patan tribe, for the politi- 
 cal purpose of guarding the frontiers against the incursions 
 of the barbarous Hindoos of Jharcund.' Mr. Grant further 
 remarks that the tenure on which the district was held, 
 ' corresponded in some respects with the ancient military 
 fiefs of Europe, inasmuch as certain lands were held 
 lakhiraje, or exempted from the payment of revenue, and 
 to be solely appropriated to the maintenance of troops.' 
 There is no doubt (according to a high authority), ' that 
 the tenures here spoken of are Ghatwallee tenures, though 
 they are not mentioned by that name/ This remark 
 occurs in the judgment of the Privy Council in the case oi 
 
 1 Put Al as quoted in Digest, p. 572. 2 Ap. F. R. p. 268. 
 
 e 
 
Ixvi INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 ' Rajah Lelalund Singh, Appellant, v. The Grovernment of 
 Bengal, Respondents.' l The suit was originally brought 
 by the Grovernment against Toofany Sing Grhatwal, for 
 resumption of the revenue on his lands, and the Rajah, 
 being allowed to intervene, became the principal de- 
 fendant in the suit. A decree was pronounced in favour 
 of the Government by the special commissioner, ' who 
 ordered the land to be resumed, and assessed under clause 
 4 section 8 of Regulation I. of 1793, as being granted for 
 police establishments ; ' and an appeal having been pre- 
 ferred to Her Majesty in Council, this became 'the great 
 question in the suit.' But the judgment was reversed 
 on the 15th of June, 1855, on the ground that 'the lands 
 are not properly under the meaning of the clause relied 
 on by the Respondent ; that they were a part of the 
 Zemindary of Khurruckpore, and were included in the 
 settlement for the Zemindary, and covered by thejumma 
 assessed upon it.' With regard to the tenure their Lord- 
 ships remarked that, ' though the nature and extent of 
 the right of the Grhatwal in the Grhatwallee villages may 
 be doubtful, there clearly was some ancient law or usage 
 by which the lands were appropriated to reward the 
 services of the Grhatwals ; services which, though they 
 would include the performance of duties of police, were 
 quite as much in their origin of a military as of a civil 
 character, and would require the appointment of a dif- 
 ferent class of persons from ordinary police officers.' I 
 have noticed in an early part of this essay, that, in dis- 
 posing of the lands of a conquered country, the Imam 
 may, if he pleases, reserve them by way of ivukf, or as an 
 appropriation for the purposes of war. Khurruckpore is 
 adjacent to Beerbhoom, and it is natural to suppose that 
 Jaffier Khan, when he was making his arrangements for the 
 latter district, and had to appoint a Zemindar for Khurr- 
 uckpore, would not have left it exposed to the same tribes 
 of marauders on its frontier, but would set apart some of 
 its lands for the purpose of securing the passes against 
 
 1 Moore's Indian Appeals, vol. vi. p. 466. 
 
INTBODUCTORY ESSAY. Ixvii 
 
 their inroads. Inquiry on that subject was not deemed 
 necessary for the decision of the matter before the Court ; 
 and accordingly all that was decided was, that the Govern- 
 ment was prevented from resuming the lands because they 
 had been included in the settlement with the Zemindar. 
 But let us suppose that some such appropriation had been 
 made as conjectured by the Judicial Committee of the 
 Privy Council, that is, by way of wukf, the only way 
 recognised by the Mohammedan law. The legal effects 
 of such a measure would be to render the lands of the 
 villages inalienable for ever, and to restrict the application 
 of their produce to the purposes designated so long as 
 they were capable of being fulfilled. All that would re- 
 main to the appropriator in such circumstances would be 
 the right to appoint from time to time proper persons to 
 carry into effect the purposes of the appropriation. This 
 right would pass, by the transfer of the Dewany, to the 
 East India Company ; and it is all that could pass or be 
 transferred by them to the Zemindar of Khurruckpore, by 
 including the lands in his Zemin dary at the time of the 
 perpetual settlement of the revenue ; so that, if there ever 
 was an actual appropriation of the land, as is highly prob- 
 able, its produce could never be lawfully diverted from 
 the purposes originally designated, and neither the 
 Government nor the Zemindar would have any power to 
 resume the revenue of the land, though each were en- 
 tirely unembarrassed by the rights of the other : not even, 
 though the purposes should in the course of time happen 
 to fail ; for then, according to Aboo Yoosuf, whose opinion 
 has been generally adopted, the produce must be applied 
 for the benefit of the poor. 
 
 It is only land that there is any authority for saying 
 that the Imam could reserve, by way of wukf for warlike 
 purposes. If the land were disposed of, as, for instance, 
 if it were in the possession of ryots, or cultivators, all 
 that would remain to the Government would be the 
 revenue, which could be made directly available for war- 
 like or other purposes, only by tunkhas, or assignments, 
 directed to the persons by whom it was payable ; in 
 
 e 2 
 
Ixviii INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 other words, by granting jageers, which, if burdened 
 with services to be performed, as in the case of the 
 ghatwals, would be conditional. If the jageers were re- 
 newed when they became vacant, the tenure of any ex- 
 isting ghatwal would present the same appearance as if 
 the land had been originally appropriated to ghatwallee 
 purposes. But then the grantor would be under no obli- 
 gation to renew, and might, on the occurrence of a 
 vacancy, resume the revenue for any other purpose to 
 which the khiraj was applicable ; which he would be pre- 
 cluded from doing if there ever had been any special 
 appropriation. These remarks will prepare us for the 
 consideration of another class of ghatwallee cases more 
 recently disposed of in the Privy Council, by the decision 
 in what was taken as the ruling case of the whole, namely, 
 the case of Rajah Nilmoney Singh, Appellant, v. The 
 Government of Bengal and Beer Singh, Respondents. 
 The suit was originally brought by the Rajah against 
 Beer Singh for the resumption of certain villages, on the 
 ground that the plaintiff's ancestor gave them to the de- 
 fendants' ancestor, in lieu of pay for personal services to 
 be rendered to the Pachete Zemindars, which were no 
 longer required. The Government put in a claim on the 
 ground that the villages constituted a jageer mehal for 
 the payment of police services, and that the Plaintiff 
 could not resume the lands so long as Government re- 
 quired the services to be rendered. This, it will be seen 
 hereafter, became the main point in the case, and the 
 only one that was decided by the judgment. But Beer 
 Singh himself merely stated in his Answer that the dis- 
 puted villages were his ancestral jageer. The true nature 
 of the jageer, however, came out in the statements of 
 third parties, who claimed to have some interest in them. 
 From these statements it appeared that the villages 
 formed the jageer lands of Ghat Dhekea, of which Beer 
 Singh was only the sirdar, or head jageerdar, having 
 subordinates under him (including the claimants) who 
 were called tabehdars ; and these facts were confirmed by 
 Beer Singh's witnesses, and indeed admitted by himself, 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Ixix 
 
 when called upon as a witness on behalf of Government. 
 He then declared that the jageer lands of Ghat Dhekea 
 had been given to his ancestor in order to protect the 
 ghat, and that, in fact, he and the other jageer dars 
 against whom similar suits were brought by the same 
 plaintiff, 'are Government Ghatwals.' In these circum- 
 stances the Plaintiff filed, as evidence in the suit, the 
 copj of an old sunnud given to the ancestor of another 
 jageerdar, but said to be applicable to the jageers in all 
 the cases. It was in the following terms : ' To Mohagur 
 Singh of good manners. It is written that in the Pergunnah 
 of Khaspaille,. there is a jummah of yours, in the village of 
 Bitrajore, a former jageer. Having confirmed this, you are 
 appointed to the office. Divide the rent of the mouzahs in 
 the year 1176 into two parts. Taking possession of one 
 share of the jageer, you shall remain in the performance of 
 the service with your brothers. If you do anything to the 
 contrary the jageer will be resumed. Dated the 7th 
 Assar, 1177. The end. The 18th June ' (1780). The 
 sunnud bore the seal of a British officer, as well as the 
 signature of the Zemindar, and, as Zemindars at that 
 time were only officers of the Government, it is evident 
 that it must have been granted by the governing power 
 of the time. Now, as regards the contents of the sunnud, 
 it will be remembered thai jummah is the proper subject 
 of a jageer, and, as it came out in evidence that the lands 
 were in the possession of ryots, it is evident that all which 
 could be received .by the ghatwals was the jummah, or re- 
 venue, payable by them; and that, therefore, the ghatwallee 
 tenure in this and the other cases was, not merely in name 
 but in substance also, a conditional jageer. The main 
 question, however, in the suit was that raised by the 
 Government, as already mentioned, and it was accordingly 
 that only that was decided. The suit was dismissed on 
 the ground that the plaintiff could not resume the lands 
 so long as Government required the services to be ren- 
 dered, and the judgment was confirmed on the same 
 grounds on appeal. A special appeal was then preferred 
 to the High Court of Calcutta, and, that Court being 
 
1XX INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 bound by the concurrent judgments of the Courts below, 
 the appeal was dismissed, and the judgment was con- 
 firmed on a further appeal to the Privy Council. The 
 question how the lands were settled at the Decennial 
 settlement was deemed immaterial by the judge of first 
 instance, because, being devoted and held subject to 
 service rendered to Grovernment, ' the Zemindar could not 
 resume unless the Grovernment waived its right.' This 
 may be thought to imply that, in the opinion of the judge, 
 the Zemindar would not be precluded from resuming the 
 lands if the Grovernment should ever think proper to waive 
 its claim. The lands were liable to what was called a 
 punchukee, or low rent, and the real object of the Zemin- 
 dar was to raise it by re-assessment up to the full amount 
 of a proper jummah. It did not appear when this rent 
 was imposed on the land, but let us suppose that it existed 
 at the time of the decennial settlement, and had been 
 taken into account in fixing the revenue of the Zemindary, 
 still a part of the jummah was in jageer, and the land pro 
 tanto lakhiraj. But by 36 Reg. VIII. of 1793, < all ex- 
 isting lakherage lands ' were expressly excluded from the 
 settlement, ' whether exempted from the kherage (or 
 public revenue) with or without due authority.' It is 
 difficult, therefore, to conceive how the Zemindar could 
 have any right to that part of the jummah which was in 
 jageer, even though the Grovernment should waive its 
 claim to the service ; in other words, how he should ever 
 be able to raise the rent above the punchukee to which it 
 was already liable. 
 
 In the case of the ghatwals of Khurruckpore,the Grovern- 
 ment was prevented from resuming the revenue of the lands 
 because they had been included in the settlement with 
 the Zemindar. That objection would not apply to the 
 ghatwallee jageers in Pachete ; and it would seem that 
 the Grovernment, being under no obligation to keep up 
 the jageers, might resume the revenue of the land so far 
 as it had been in jageer, at any time on the occur- 
 ence of a vacancy. They might, however, be restrained 
 by equitable considerations arising out of circumstances 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. 
 
 not fully developed in the proceedings of the case before 
 the Court. 
 
 In the case of the Khurruckpore ghatwals, the tenure is 
 supposed to have originated in a special appropriation of 
 the land. In that of the Pachete ghatwals the tenure 
 was evidently a conditional jageer. But it appeared 
 from the copy of the old sunnud, and other evidence in 
 the case of Beer Singh, that appointments to the office 
 whenever it became vacant were usually made in the 
 same family ; until at length the leading member of the 
 family seems to have assumed the office on a vacancy with- 
 out waiting for a formal appointment from the superior au- 
 thority. Thus, Beroo Singh, the grandfather of Beer Singh, 
 was succeeded by his son,Pochum Singh, he by his son,Roop 
 Singh, and he by his infant son Chundy Churn Singh, for 
 whom his uncle, Beer Singh, continued to manage ihe ghat- 
 wallee for several years, and it was not till his death that 
 Beer Singh became the jageerdar. Long before this the 
 Ghatwallee tenure had become hereditary in Beerbhoom, 
 where, as already mentioned, it seems to have originated ; 
 for in the preamble to Eegulation XXIX. of 1814, 'this 
 class of persons ' (meaning the ghatwals) are said to be 
 ' entitled to hold their lands generation after generation 
 in perpetuity ; subject, nevertheless, to an established and 
 fixed rent to the Zemindar of Beerbhoom, and to the per- 
 formance of certain duties for the maintenance of the 
 public peace and support of the police/ The Regulation 
 being silent as to any division of the lands between co- 
 sharers, or the heirs of a deceased ghatwal, a suit was 
 brought in the Zillah Court of Beerbhoom by Hurlal 
 Singh, one of three sharers, against his co-sharers for a 
 regular butwara or division of the mehal, and separate 
 possession of the share belonging to him. The judge 
 decreed that the several shareholders should hold joint 
 possession, and that the profits, after the payment of 
 necessary expenses, should be divided amongst the several 
 partners in proportion to their respective shares. A 
 special appeal having been preferred to the Sudder 
 Dewany Adawlut of Calcutta, the judge before whom it 
 
INTRODUCTORY ESSAT. 
 
 first came for decision, referred" the point whether such 
 property came under the Hindoo rules of inheritance, and 
 might be divided among the coparceners, to the opinion 
 of his colleagues ; and out of six judges of which the 
 Court was composed, five were of opinion that the mehal 
 could not be divided. The question was put with refer- 
 ence to the nature of the ghatwallee mehals generally, 
 and the single judge who differed from his colleagues was 
 of opinion that the question should be decided by local 
 usage. The judge who referred the case then gave 
 his decision ' that a mehal of this nature cannot be divided, 
 but should on the death of an incumbent devolve entirely 
 on the eldest son or the next ghatwal ; ' and another 
 judge having concurred with him, the judgment became 
 final. (Reports, vol. vi. p. 171.) The first part of the 
 judgment, having reference to the general nature of ghat- 
 wallee lands, is a precedent on the point that lands of 
 that kind cannot be divided wherever they may happen to 
 be situated. But the question of succession to such lands 
 was not properly before the Court, and the latter part of 
 the judgment ought, perhaps, to be considered as only an 
 obiter dictum of the two judges. It seems also doubtful 
 whether they thought that the succession to the land 
 should follow that of the ghatwallee, or vice versa. The 
 former meaning seems to be more congenial to the origin 
 and history of the ghatwallee tenure, particularly when 
 the duties to it were more exclusively of a military char- 
 acter, and required the selection of better qualified 
 persons for their performance. Afterwards, when the 
 duties sunk into those of mere police, which almost any 
 person was qualified to perform, the power of selection 
 may have fallen into abeyance, and then the succession to 
 the office would more naturally follow that of the land. 
 Usage seems to have been tending in that direction in 
 the case of the Pachete jageerdars ; and on the whole, 
 usage may, perhaps, be the safest guide in cases to which 
 the last-mentioned precedent may not be considered to be 
 strictly applicable. 
 
THE LAND TAX OF INDIA, 
 
 ACCORDING TO THE MOOHUMMUDAN LAW. 
 
THE 
 
 LAND TAX OF INDIA 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 OF OOSHR 1 AND KHIRAJ, 2 OR TITHE AND TRIBUTE. 
 
 [This Chapter is taken from the Futawa Alumgeeree, vol. ii. p, 337.] 
 
 LANDS are of two kinds, Ooshree and KJiirajee ; and the Ooshree 
 whole land of Arabia, which comprehends the lands of 
 
 Tehama, Hejaz, Mecca, Yemen, Taif, Ooman, and Bahrein, Arabia is 
 
 is Ooshree. 3 Moohummud has said that the land of Arabia 
 
 extends from Azeeb to Mecca, and from Aden Abein to 
 
 the remotest coast of Yemen, in Mehrah, and that with 
 
 regard to the Sowad 4 of Irak, so much of it as is watered 
 
 by Ajumee, 5 canals, is KJiirajee. The Sowad extends in The Sowad 
 
 1 Literally a tefth part. 
 
 2 Pronounced also Khuraj. It means literally going out, and 
 is applied in law to tribute, as an " outgoing " from the produce 
 of the earth. Inayah, vol. ii. p. 587. 
 
 3 Because neither the Prophet nor any of his four orthodox 
 successors, imposed the Kliiraj on that country. Hidayah, vol. ii. 
 p. 775; Translation, vol. ii. p. 204. 
 
 4 Literally blackness. It is applied to the villages of Irak, from 
 the dark green colour of their trees and crops. Kifayah, vol. ii. 
 p. 774. 
 
 5 Persian, but more generally every people not Arabian. 
 
 B 
 
2' r '' 'T?H"E' LAND 'TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 of Irak is length from the boundaries of Mowsul to the land of Abad- 
 den, and in breadth from the termination of the mountains 
 in the land of Hulwan to the remotest part of Kadseea, 
 Rules as near to Azeeb in the territory of Arabia. Every country 
 countries, besides these, which was forcibly subdued and bestowed on 
 its inhabitants, without their embracing the faith of Islam, 
 is K/iirajee (if connected with K/iiraj water l ); and every 
 country which was peaceably subdued by submitting to the 
 jizyut,* is also Khiraj land. But every country forcibly 
 subdued and divided by the Imam among the soldiers, 3 is 
 Ooshree. While every country forcibly subdued, the in- 
 habitants of which embraced the faith before the Imam had 
 passed any order with regard to them, was at his discretion, 
 and might be divided among the soldiers, whereupon it 
 would have become Ooshree; or if he pleased, he might 
 have bestowed it upon the inhabitants, and after the be- 
 stowal he would still have had the option of imposing the 
 Ooshr upon it, or the Khiraj if it were watered by Khiraj 
 water. (Futawa Kazee Khan). 
 
 Every land, the people of which voluntarily embrace the 
 faith, is Ooshree. And in this manner the whole land 
 of Arabia, when it was subdued by force and violence, 
 and its inhabitants, from being worshippers of idols, were 
 converted to the faith, and the Imam gave up their lands 
 to them, became Ooshree.' 1 So, also, every country of the 
 nations of Ajum, 5 with regard to which, when the Imam 
 conquered it, he hesitated whether he should grant the 
 people their lives and lands, and impose on the latter the 
 Khiraj, or should divide it among the soldiers, and impose 
 
 1 Briefly explained in the next chapter, but more fully in the 
 introduction. 
 
 2 Capitation tax. Submission to it implies submission to 
 Khiraj also, which is sometimes called the jizyut of land. 
 
 3 Arab. Ghanimeen, persons entitled to the plunder, from ghu- 
 neemut, booty. 
 
 4 The fact is, that idolatry was not tolerated in Arabia, and 
 the greater part of its inhabitants being idolaters, had no alterna- 
 tive but to embrace the faith. 
 
 5 That is, every country but Arabia. 
 
TITHE AND TRIBUTE. 3 
 
 the Ooshr on the land, and then said, " I have made their 
 lands Ooshree" and began to do so, but subsequently granted 
 the people their lives and lands, remains Ooshree. This 
 Moohummud has stated in the Nuwadir, and Kurkhee in 
 his book. And in like manner, Kliiraj land, when cut off 
 from the supply of Khiraj water, and watered with Ooshr 
 water, is Ooshree. l (Moheet.) 
 
 When a person has brought waste land into cultivation, Waste 
 if it be contiguous to Khirajee land, it is Khirajee, and if it ^^^g^ 
 be contiguous to Ooshree land, it is Ooshree. 2 But this, ed when 
 only, when the person who brought it into cultivation was int^culti- 
 a Mooslim; for if he were a Zimmee, 3 the. land would be vation. 
 K/iirajee, even though it should be contiguous to Ooshree 
 land. Bussorah is Ooshree by the general agreement of the 
 companions. 4 ( Siraj-ool-wuhhaj. ) 
 
 The K/iiraj of lands is of two kinds; Mookasimah, 5 which Khiraj Is of 
 is something out of the produce, as a fifth or sixth, or the ^j^f s ' 
 like ; and Wuzeefa, 6 which is something in obligation, 7 and mah and 
 dependent on the return that the land is capable of yield- ] 
 ing. (Futawa Kazee Khan). The Mookasimah Khiraj 
 depends on the actual crop or issue from the land, not on 
 the kind of crop which it is capable of bearing ; insomuch 
 that, like the Ooshr, it is not due when the land, though 
 capable, is allowed to lie idle. (Tatar Khaneeah, taken 
 from the Zukheerah.) But as to the Wuzeefa Kliiraj, Wuzeefa. 
 
 1 It is implied, I think, that the land belongs to a Mooslim. 
 
 2 Moohummud differed from Aboo Huneefa and Aboo Yoosuf 
 on this point, according to his principle, that the impost is regu- 
 lated by the nature of the water. Hamilton's Hedaya, vol. ii. 
 p. 207. 
 
 3 Subject of a Mooslim power, but of a different religion. 
 
 4 From its contiguity to the Sowad it would otherwise have 
 been Khirajee. 
 
 5 Mutual division ; from kismut, division or partition. 
 
 6 Also called moowuzzuf, both words being inflexions of the 
 same root, and signifying fixed or agreed upon. 
 
 7 Indeterminate, as existing only in the obligation of the per- 
 son who is bound to render it. See Moohummudan Law of Sale, 
 (Baillie), Introduction, p. 45. 
 
THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 Moohummud has said that it is a kufeez and a dirhem 1 
 on every jureeb of land fit for sowing, and five dirhems for 
 a jureeb of vegetables, 2 and ten dirhems for a jureeb of 
 orchards. 3 (Moheet.) And on other kinds, such as saffron 
 cotton, gardens, &c., an imposition will be laid according to 
 their capability, the extreme of capability being a half of the 
 produce as the amount of duty. A garden 4 is any land 
 enclosed with a wall, and planted with different kinds of 
 palms, vines, and other trees, so wide apart that the ground 
 between them admits of being cultivated ; and if the trees 
 be so closely planted or entangled that the ground between 
 them cannot be cultivated, the place is called an orchard. 5 
 (Kafee.) 
 
 1 A foreign word, though naturalized in the Arabic language. 
 Evidently the Greek drachma; see post, page 38, where allusion 
 is made to dirhems having the sign of the cross. The value of the 
 dirhem is G-^th anas, or about 9-|d; (Galloway on the Law and 
 Constitution of India, p. iii); but see post, p. 77, note 4. 
 
 2 Arab. Rootbut, applied generally to all kinds of green vege- 
 tables, but more particularly such as remain in the ground for 
 several years, (Inayah, vol. ii., p. 589,) and have no fixed time 
 of maturity, but may be cut at any time. (Kifayah, vol. iv., p. 
 1007.) Mr. Hamilton describes the land on which five dirhems are 
 due as "every joreeb of pasture land," (Hedaya, vol. ii. p. 207) ; but 
 Rootbut is the term in the original, and grass, the principal growth 
 of pasture land, is common property. See Moohummudan Law 
 of Sale (Baillie), p. 147, note. 
 
 3 These were the rates imposed by the Khuleef Omar on the 
 Sowad of Irak (Hidayah, vol. ii., p. 776); and they were adjusted 
 to the different kinds of crops, according to the different degrees 
 of labour required in their cultivation, that on orchards being 
 least, because the trees continue for a long time ; on arable lands 
 being greatest, because they require to be cultivated and sown 
 every year ; and the labour on Rootbut being intermediate, because 
 they are calculated to last for several years. Inayah, vol. ii, 
 p. 588. 
 
 4 Bostan, a Persian word. 
 
 5 The arabic word kirm signifies, among other meanings, a grape- 
 vine, and from the entanglement of the trees might perhaps be 
 more properly translated a vineyard ; but it appears that there are 
 other trees, as well as vines, in a kirm, and its distinctive cha- 
 racter is that the trees (vines, or date), are so closely planted as to 
 prevent the sowing of the intermediate ground. Hidayah, vol. ii., 
 p. 776. 
 
TITHE AND TRIBUTE. 5 
 
 Jureeb is the name of an area of sixty by sixty moolkee 
 ziras; and a moolkee zira is seven hands; being one hand in 
 excess of the common zira, (so much is expressed in the 
 book of Ooshr and Khiraj.) -The Sheikh ool Islam, known as 
 Khwahir Zaduh, has said, that Moohummud, in describing 
 the jureeb as an area of sixty by sixty ziras, referred to 
 the jureeb then in use, and that it is not a fixed quantity 
 for all lands, but that the jureeb of land changes with the 
 change of countries; hence, regard will be had, in every 
 country, to what is well known among its people ; and further, 
 that he meant by a kufeez, a saa, which is eight rutls l of Irak, 
 and that is four minas ; (this was the opinion of Aboo 
 Huneefa and Moohummud, and the first opinion of Aboo 
 Yoosuf) ; and that this kufeez is a kufeez of wheat, (so he 
 has stated in one place of the book of Ooshr and Khiraj, 
 but in another place of it he has stated that it is a kufeez 
 of whatever grain is sown in that land, which ,is correct). 
 And it should further be said, that it is a kufeez, with the 
 addition of two handfulls; which some explain by saying 
 that he meant that the measurer should put up his hands on 
 both sides of the kufeez at the time of measuring from the heap, 
 and holding fast all that is taken up of the grain between 
 his hands, should place the whole of what is in the kufeez, 
 and in his two hands, into the sack of the collector ; 2 while 
 others say, that he meant that the measurer should fill the 
 kufeez, then draw his hand over the top so as to level all 
 above it, and empty the kufeez into the sack of the collector, 
 
 1 The rutl, in Egypt, according to Mr. Lane, is 144 dirhems in 
 weight, and varies from 15 oz. 10 dr. 22^ gr., to nearly 15 oz. 
 13 dr., avoirdupois (Modern Egyptians, vol ii., p. 371), or a little 
 less than 1 Ib. The rutl of Irak is somewhat less ; if, as seems 
 probable, it be the same as the rutl of Bagdad, which is described 
 as containing 20 astars of 4^ mithkals each (Fut. Alum, vol. i., 
 p. 269); that is, taking the mithkal, according to Mr. Lane, at 
 1-i- dtrhems, the rutl of Irak would be only 135 dirhems. That 
 the rutl or saa was not a very large quantity, is evident from 
 half a saa of wheat or barley being what a good Mooslim is 
 required to give the poor as alms at the Ftir, for each member 
 of his family. 
 
 2 Arab. Ashir, literally tithesman. 
 
THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 To be oc- 
 casionally 
 reduced 
 when the 
 crops are 
 deficient. 
 
 Can it be 
 lawfully 
 increased 
 when they 
 are abun- 
 dant. 
 
 after which he is to fill his two hands from the heap and 
 empty them also into the sack, in addition to the kufeez. 1 
 
 The above quantity is due only once a year, whether the 
 proprietor sow his lands once or more than once; contrary to 
 the case of the Mookasimah Khiraj, and the Ooshr, for there 
 what is due being a part of the actual produce, it is to be 
 repeated as often as the produce is renewed. 2 
 
 What we have reported as to the quantity of the Khiraj, 
 has reference to a case where lands are able to bear so much, 
 but when they are not able to bear so much by reason of a 
 falling off of the crop, the quantity is to be reduced to what 
 the land can bear. A reduction then from the Wuzeefa of 
 Omar where the land is unable to bear that Wuzeefa, is lawful, 
 according to all opinions. 3 But is an addition to this Wuzeefa 
 lawful, when the land is able to bear it, by reason of an 
 abundant crop ? On lands where the Wuzeefa actually issued 
 from Omar .himself, it is not lawful, according to all opinions ; 
 and in like manner, .on lands where the Wuzeefa was imposed 
 by an Imam, in express accordance with the example of Omar, 
 the addition is also unlawful, according to all opinions, even 
 though the addition can be borne. 4 So also, if it should happen, 
 that the same Imam who imposed the Wuzeefa, after the exam- 
 ple of Omar, should wish to make an addition to that Wuzeefa, 
 it would not be competent to him to do so, though the lands 
 were able to bear it. And in like manner, if he should wish 
 to convert that Wuzeefa into one of a different kind, as, for 
 instance, if the first Wuzeefa were dirJiems, and he should 
 wish to convert it to the Mookasimah, or if it were Mookasi- 
 
 1 The authority for the last paragraph is not given by the 
 compilers of the Futawa Alumgeeree. 
 
 2 No authority cited. 
 
 3 This is confirmed by the Hidayah, vol. ii. p. 777, Translation 
 vol. ii. p. 208 ; and see post, p. 64 ; from which it would seem that 
 the Sooltan cannot lawfully exact the full Wuzeefa in such a case, 
 but must take the Khiraj Mookasimah. 
 
 4 It is stated in the Hidayah, without any qualification, that the 
 addition is lawful, according to Moohummud, and unlawful accord- 
 ing to Aboo Yoosuf. (Translation, vol. i. p. 208.) The signifi- 
 cant words " and this is approved' 1 ' 1 are added, but they do not 
 appear in the printed copy of the original. 
 
TITHE AND TRIBUTE. 7 
 
 mah, and he should wish to convert it to dirhems, that would 
 not be in his power. If then he should make an addition 
 upon them, (that is the people,) to this Wuzeefa, or convert it 
 from one kind to another, and pass an order upon them to 
 that eifect, such being according to his judgment, and he 
 should be succeeded by another ruler who entertains an it may be 
 opposite opinion on the subject, then, if the first ruler acted ^^^ 
 with their consent, the second ruler may pass, or give cur- consent. 
 rency to what the first did ; and though the first had acted 
 without their consent, yet if the lands had been forcibly And ap- 
 subdued, and then bestowed upon them by the Imam, ^hout" 
 the second ruler might also give effect to what the first did. their con- 
 But if the lands were subdued peaceably, before the Imam case. m 
 prevailed against them, and the other circumstances of the 
 case remain the same, the second ruler will cancel the act of 
 the first. 1 
 
 With regard to lands on which the Imam is about to N O higher 
 impose a Wuzeefa for the first time, if he should exceed - tes ^J 1 * 11 
 the Wuzeefa of Omar, it would be lawful according to zeefaof 
 Moohummud, and one of two reports of Aboo Yoosuf s be^awfoUy 
 opinion, but according to Aboo Huneefa, and another report imposed 
 of Aboo Yoosuf it would not be lawful ; and this is correct. 2 
 With regard to the Mookasimah Khiraj, it is committed to except the 
 
 the Imam to fix the amount, but not so as to exceed the r , a ^ e 7 18 . 
 
 Mookasi- 
 
 half of the crop. 3 mah. 
 
 Khiraj is to be taken from every one who has become Every pro- 
 the proprietor of Khirajee land, whether infidel or mooslim, 
 
 minor or adult, or whether free, mookatib,* or mazoon slave, 5 land must 
 or whether man or woman. 6 (Molieet^) Khiraj. 
 
 1 No authority is cited by the compilers of the Futawa Alum- 
 geeree, and it is evident that the above has reference only to the 
 Wuzeefa of one year, when the crop is more than usually abundant. 
 
 2 It seems to follow a fortiori that a Wuzeefa once established, 
 cannot be permanently altered to the detriment of the people. 
 
 3 The authority is not cited. 
 
 4 A slave with whom his master has entered into a contract of 
 emancipation for a ransom. 
 
 5 One licensed by his master to trade. 
 
 6 As it is the proprietor of the land who is liable for 
 Khiraj 3 it seems superfluous to remark that the Sooltan or 
 
THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 Wukfl&nA 
 is subject 
 to Ooshr 
 an&Khiraj. 
 Usurpa- 
 tion of 
 Khirajland 
 how it 
 affects the 
 owner's 
 liability. 
 
 Liability 
 in the case 
 of mort- 
 gage. 
 
 Lease, or 
 loan. 
 
 Ooshr and Khiraj are due on wukf lands. 1 (Wujeez-ool- 
 Kurdery.) 
 
 Land, the Khiraj of which is Wuzeefa, has been usurped 
 by an usurper. If the usurper should deny the fact, and 
 the proprietor 2 be without proof; then, supposing that the 
 usurper has not sown the land, no one is liable for the 
 Khiraj ; but if he have sown the land, and the sowing has 
 not endamaged it, the KJiiraj is on the usurper. If, on the 
 other hand, the usurper had acknowledged the usurpation, 
 or the proprietor had proof of the fact, and the land were 
 not endamaged by the sowing, the landlord 3 would be liable, 
 and if it were endamaged by the sowing, he would also be 
 liable, according to Aboo Huneefa, whether the damage were 
 little or much, in the same way as if he had let the land to 
 the usurper with responsibility for damage. 4 And in a Bye- 
 alr-wufaf when the purchaser has taken possession, he is in 
 the same position as an usurper. If one should let his Khi- 
 rajee land, or lend it, he would be liable for the Khiraj, in 
 the same way as if he had given it up in moozarautf except 
 
 ruler cannot be the proprietor. But to put this point beyond 
 the possibility of doubt, it is expressly stated in the Hidayah 
 "that the lands of the Sowad (on which Omar first imposed the 
 Khiraj} are the property of the inhabitants, who may lawfully sell 
 or otherwise dispose of them." Vol. ii. p. 775 ; Translation, vol. 
 ii. p. 205. 
 
 1 Lands settled to pious or charitable uses. 
 
 2 Arab. Malik. 
 
 3 Arab. Rub-ool-Urz, literally lord or master of the land. The 
 same person who is called malik. 
 
 4 The passage is obscure, but its meaning seems to be, that 
 where there is proof of the usurpation, the proprietor is liable 
 for the Khiraj, whether the land be damaged by the sowing or 
 not ; and that when there is no such pooof, the usurper is liable 
 when the land is not damaged; but it seems left open to doubt 
 who is liable for the Khiraj in this case, when the land is damaged ; 
 see post, page 30. Without an express agreement, a hireling or 
 lessee is not responsible for damage, according to Aboo Huneefa. 
 Hamilton's Hedaya, vol. iii., p. 350. 
 
 5 Conditional sale or mortgage. 
 
 6 A co-partnership in cultivation between a proprietor of land 
 and a cultivator. 
 
TITHE AND TRIBUTE. 9 
 
 when it is an orchard, or under vegetables or trees closely 
 planted or entangled together. 1 (Futawa Kazee Khan.) 
 
 If Ooshree land be let to hire, the Ooshr is on the land- Liability 
 lord, according to Aboo Huneefa, but on the tenant, 
 
 according to both his companions. If Ooshree land be lent, land when 
 
 ., let to hire. 
 and sown by the borrower, there are two reports ot Aboo 
 
 Huneefa's opinion. If land fit for sowing be let to hire, or 
 lent, and the hirer or borrower should plant it with vines, 
 or make it into a vegetable ground, the Khiraj would be 
 on the hirer or borrower, according to Aboo Huneefa and When 
 Moohummud. 2 If Ooshree land be usurped and sown, and u 
 no damage done by the sowing, the landlord is not liable for 
 Ooshr, but if damage be done by the sowing, he is liable for 
 Ooshr, in the same way as if he had let the land with the 
 damage. 3 (Futawa Kazee Khan.) 
 
 A man having Khirajee land, sells it at a time that it is Sale of 
 quite void; if so much of the year remain as to allow of j^^- 
 the purchaser's sowing the land, he is liable for the Kliiraj, justment 
 whether he sow it or not ; but if enough of the year does between* y 
 
 not remain to admit of this, the seller is liable for the seller and 
 
 purchaser. 
 Kliiraj, and they say that whether the seed be wheat, or 
 
 barley, or whatever it may be, the period should be such 
 as to allow the crop to ripen, or to attain to such a degree 
 of forwardness as to be worth double the Khiraj. On this 
 point there are various opinions, but, according to the futwah, 
 the prescribed time is_;three months; and if so much should 
 remain, the purchaser would be liable; if not, the liability 
 would fall on the seller. (Futawa Koolra.) But suppose 
 that a person should purchase Khirajee land, and that before 
 it has been in his possession a sufficient time to enable him 
 to sow it, the Sooltan should take the khiraj from him; it 
 would not be competent to the purchaser to have recourse 
 against the seller. (Futawa Kazee Khan.) But when the 
 
 1 It seems to be implied in the excepted cases, from the nature 
 of the land, that the lease is for several years. 
 
 2 It seems also implied here that the lease is for several years. 
 
 3 The meaning seems to require " with responsibility for the " 
 damage. See ante, p. 8, note 4. 
 
 c 
 
10 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 Sooltan takes it from a cultivator, the land being in his 
 possession, and he is unable to prevent it, he has a right 
 of recourse against the proprietor. According to the Zahir 
 Rewayut, however, he has no recourse, and this is correct. 1 
 (Wujeez-ool-Kurdery.) If the land yield two crops, the 
 autumnal and spring, and one is delivered to the seller, and 
 one to the purchaser, or each of them has it in his power 
 to reap one of the crops, they are both liable for the Khiraj. 
 (Moheet.) A man sells Khirajee land, and the purchaser 
 sells it to another, after a month; the second then sells 
 it to a third, in like manner, so that the year expires, and 
 the land has not been the property of any of them for 
 three months ; none of them is liable for the Khiraj. They 
 say, however, that the correct view of this case is to look 
 to the last purchaser, and if the property remained in his 
 hands for three months, he would be liable for the Khiraj. 2 
 A person sells land in which there is a crop not yet arrived 
 at maturity, and he sells it with the crop; the purchaser 
 is liable for the Kliiraj under all circumstances. And if he 
 sell it after the grain has fixed or set, and the crop has 
 attained to maturity, the lawyer Aboo Leeth has said, that 
 the case is the same as if he were to sell land void of any 
 crop, and sell with it some reaped wheat. This that we 
 have stated has reference to a time when the Khiraj was 
 usually taken at the end of the year, but if it be taken in 
 the beginning of the year by way of advance, that is mere 
 Khiraj is oppression, and neither seller nor purchaser liable. A man 
 the rent of ^ as a v ^ a o e m n ^ s Kliirajee land, in which there are 
 houses in houses and lodgings ; nothing is due on account of the 
 village, whether he receive grain from it or not. 3 And in 
 
 1 This must, I think, be understood only of the case where the 
 land has not been in the cultivator's possession for three months, 
 and the Sooltan's act is therefore oppressive and unlawful, - for 
 otherwise the owner would be liable, as already stated, whether 
 the land had been put into the cultivator's possession under a 
 moozaraut, or a lease. 
 
 * This is, I think, the meaning, but it would seem that the 
 possession must be carried on into the following year. 
 
 3 The grain being a rent for the houses, not for the land. 
 Here, it may be remarked, that the land and the village are both 
 
TITHE AND TKIBUTE. 11 
 
 like manner, when a man has a mansion bounded or marked 
 out in a Mooslim city, and makes it into a garden, or plants 
 it with palm trees and separates it from his lodging, there is 
 nothing due for it, because what remains of the land follows nor on the 
 the mansion. 1 But if he make the whole of the mansion f 
 into a garden, Ooshr is due for it if in Ooshree land, and 
 Khiraj if in Khirajee land. A man buys Kldrajee land and 
 builds a mansion upon it ; he is liable for Khiraj, though 
 there should be nothing left capable of tillage. 
 
 When the Sooltan has given the Khiraj to the owner 2 Applica- 
 of the land and left it on him, 3 it is lawful, according to a 
 
 saying of Aboo Yoosuf, which however is contrary to one by the 
 of Moohummud ; but the futwa is in accordance with the the owner 
 saying of Aboo Yoosuf, when the owner of the land is one ^ 
 of the class entitled to Khiraj,* and on this principle it would lawful. 
 be lawful in favour of Kazees and lawyers. 5 When the Sool- 
 tan has not made any demand for Khiraj of the person by 
 
 said to belong to a person to whom the villagers pay rent in corn 
 for their dwellings: It is obvious that they are not the pro- 
 prietors. 
 
 1 Nothing is due for a mansion, post, p. 28, note 1. 
 
 2 Arab. Sahib-ool- Urz, literally, companion of the land. " This 
 word (Sahib) is much used in composition, to denote the master 
 or possessor of any quality or thing," as " Sahib-i-tukht, possessor 
 of a throne, a king;" " Sahib-ool-mal, a wealthy proprietor." 
 Richardson's Persian and Arabic Dictionary. I prefer " owner or 
 proprietor to possessor" because in the contract of Moozaraut the 
 possession of the land must be with the cultivator, while the pro- 
 prietor is termed Sahib. 
 
 3 That is, without demanding payment. 
 
 4 Literally, the people of Khiraj. 
 
 5 The following are the objects and persons on whom the Khiraj 
 is to be expended, viz. : Donations to the troops, securing the 
 passes, erecting fortifications, establishing watch-houses in the 
 Mooslim territory as a protection against highway thieves, re- 
 pairing bridges, clearing the channels of great rivers that have no 
 proprietors, such as the Oxus, the Tigris, and Euphrates, building 
 of caravanseras and places of worship, repairing breaches in 
 embankments, providing for governors and their assistants, and 
 Kazees, Moofties, and police, and the teachers and students of 
 learning, and every person employed in serving the Mooslims, or 
 otherwise generally for the benefit of believers. Futawa Alum. 
 vol. i. p. 268. 
 
12 
 
 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 Applica- 
 tion of 
 Ooshr by 
 the Sool- 
 tan to the 
 owner of 
 the land 
 is not law- 
 ful. 
 
 whom it is due 3 it is incumbent on the owner of the land to 
 expend it in charity ; but if he should expend it in charity 
 after a demand has been made, he would not be released from 
 his obligation. 1 When an Amil has left the Khiraj on a 
 Moozarea; 2 without the knowledge of the Sooltan, it is lawful, 
 though a disbursement. 3 
 
 Moohummud has said, that when the Sooltan has given 
 the Ooshr to the owner of the land, it is not lawful, and 
 about this there is no difference of opinion. 4 But the 
 Sheikh-ool-Islam has related, that when the Sooltan has left 
 the Ooshr on the owner of the land, the case is to be con- 
 sidered in two ways; first, when he has left it through 
 neglect, by reason of forgetfulness, and here it is incumbent 
 on the person who is liable for the Ooshr to expend its amount 
 on the poor ; and second, when the Sooltan has left it inten- 
 tionally with his knowledge, and this case also presents two 
 aspects ; if the person who is liable for the Ooshr be rich, the 
 Sooltan's act is lawful, but he must make good the amount 
 from the Khiraj treasury to the Alms treasury; 5 and if the 
 
 1 It is obvious that what is above stated of the application of 
 Khiraj, has reference only to the Khiraj of the year or particular 
 time, not to the right to it in future. 
 
 2 The cultivator under a contract of Moozaraut. 
 
 3 The expression is obscure. It probably means, that though 
 it is the duty of the Amil to collect the revenue, not to disburse 
 it, and this is tantamount to a disbursement, still it is lawful. The 
 case may refer to land where the cultivator is the Moozarea of 
 the Sooltan, that is, where there is no intermediate proprietor 
 between them, for it is said, that the Khiraj is on the Moozarea, or 
 that he is liable for it. In the contract of Moozaraut, the words 
 Amil and Moozarea are usually applied to the same person, 
 that is, the cultivator, which makes some further obscurity 
 in the passage. I have adopted the construction in the text, 
 taking the word Amil to signify " a collector of the revenue" 
 (Richardson ;) a sense in which it is still used by native govern- 
 ments in India, and is sometimes employed in the Futawa Alum- 
 geeree, See vol. i. p. 264. 
 
 4 That is, that such was his opinion. 
 
 5 There are four departments of the Beit-ool-mal, or public 
 treasury. The first is for the Zukat of flocks and herds, ooshr or 
 tithes, and what is taken by the tithesman from Mooslim mer- 
 chants who go to him ; the second, for the fifths of plunder, mines, 
 and buried treasures; the third, for the Khiraj, the Jizyut, and 
 
TITHE AND TRIBUTE. 13 
 
 person on whom the Ooshr is, be poor and in need of it, the 
 leaving of it upon him is lawful, and the Ooshr is as alms 
 to him, and lawful in the same way as if it had been first 
 taken from, and then expended upon him. (Zukheerah.) 
 
 Moohummud has said, in the Jama Sugheer, that a man Khiraj is 
 having Khirajee land, who allows it to remain idle, is liable i^f^ ug 
 for the Khiraj. (Moheet.) But this is when the Khiraj is untilled, 
 Moowuzzuf; for when the Khiraj is Mookasimah nothing is 
 due under such circumstances. (Siraj-ool- Wuhhaj.) They 
 say, that when a man changes to the lower of two kinds 
 of cultivation without excuse, he is liable for the Kldraj 
 of the higher ; as for instance, if one who had saffron lands, 
 should sow them with grain, and abandon the cultivation 
 of saffron, he would be liable for the Khiraj of saffron; and 
 in like manner, if he had an orchard, and were to cut it 
 down, and sow the land with grain, he would be liable for 
 the Khiraj of orchards. This is obvious or proper, but 
 decisions are not given to that effect, lest they should lead 
 to the oppression of men's property. * (Kafee. ) 
 
 Where a person who is subject to Kliiraj has embraced or the . 
 
 owner is 
 
 the faith of Islam, Khiraj is to be taken from him as before; converted 
 and it is lawful for a Mooslim to purchase Khirajee land from ^^^ 
 a Zimmee, but Kliiraj will be taken from him. (Hidayah.) faith. 
 
 Ooshr and Khiraj are not joined together in the same land, OosArand 
 whether the land be Ooshree or Khirajee ; and if one should cannot 
 purchase Ooshree or Khirajee land to trade with, he would be bo * h b 
 liable for Ooshr or Khiraj, as the case might be, without the the same 
 Zukat for trade. (Moheet.) When a Zimmee has purchased landt 
 Ooshree land, Aboo Huneefa and Zoofr have said that Khiraj 
 should be taken from him. 2 (Zad.) 
 
 what the Beni Nujran and Beni Tooghlib have compounded for, 
 and also what is collected by the tithesman from Moostamins, 
 (foreigners under protection,) and Zimmee merchants; and the 
 fourth for troves. Futawa Alumgeeree, vol. i. p. 268. 
 
 1 The meaning is. that though strictly in accordance with prin- 
 ciple, and lawful to exact the higher rate in the cases supposed, 
 yet that the power is so liable to abuse, that it is not to be coun- 
 tenanced by the judge's decree. Inayah, vol. ii., p. 590. 
 
 2 According to Aboo Yoosuf he will be liable to a double 
 
14 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 Course to If a family l or set of persons subject to Khiraj, is un- 
 by ruler 16 a ^ e to Prepare their lands or reap the produce, and pay 
 when per- their Khiraj, the Imam is not at liberty to take their 
 jectto " l an ds fr m them, and deliver them to other parties by 
 S?e to Way f a transfer of tne property. (Zukheerah.) Mohum- 
 cultivate mud has said, in the book of Ooshr and Khiraj, that if 
 their land. ^ owner of Kirajee land be unable to cultivate it, and 
 allows it to lie idle, or abandons it, the Imam is at 
 liberty to deliver it to any one who will abide upon it, 
 and pay the Khiraj. Hulwaee, however, has said, (and 
 it is the sound answer to give in this case,) that the Imam 
 should first let the lands to hire, take the rent, and 
 deduct the Khiraj from it, and keep the remainder for 
 the landlord, (and Moohummud has reported to the same 
 effect in the Zeeaduli); but if he cannot find a person 
 who will take the land on hire, he should then deliver it in 
 Moozaraut for a third or fourth of the produce, according to 
 the rate at which such land is usually taken at in Moozaraut, 
 and deduct the Khiraj from the share of the owner, and 
 hold the remainder for the landlord; 2 and if he cannot 
 find a person who will take the land in Moozaraut, he w T ill 
 deliver it to any one who will abide upon it and pay its 
 Khiraj. (The manner in which this is held to be legal is 
 in one of two ways; it is either placing the parties to whom 
 the land is delivered in the situation of the proprietor, 
 (malik) as to the cultivation of the land and payment of the 
 Khiraj, or it is leasing the land for the amount of the 
 Khiraj, the sum taken from the parties being Khiraj as 
 regards the Imam, and hire or rent with regard to them- 
 selves.) He has further said, that if the Imam cannot 
 
 Ooshr, and according to Moohummud to a single Ooshr, to be ap- 
 plied to the purposes of Khiraj. Hamilton's Hedaya, vol. i. p. 50. 
 
 1 Arab. Kowm. A little further on it is applied to so few as two 
 persons, who do not appear to be connected together further than 
 by their combining in a purchase. 
 
 2 It will be observed that the words owner (sahib) and lord 
 (rub) are here indifferently applied in the same sentence to the 
 person liable for the Khiraj, that is, the proprietor of the land. 
 
TITHE AND TRIBUTE. 15 
 
 find a person who will work the land for the Khiraj, he 
 may sell it and deduct the Khiraj from the price, reserving 
 the remainder for the landlord. It has been said by some, 
 that what has been related of the Imam's selling the land, 
 was only the opinion of Aboo Yoosuf and Moohummud, 
 and that according to Aboo Huneefa, it is not proper that 
 he should sell; for selling ones property is inhibiting him- 
 self, and Aboo Huneefa did not approve of the inhibition 
 of free persons; but it has also been said that it was the 
 opinion of them all, and this is correct, for Aboo Huneefa 
 allowed of inhibition in circumstances where it was for the 
 general good. 1 It is reported in some books upon this case, 
 that the Imam should purchase cattle and implements of 
 husbandry, and commit the land to some one to ^cultivate it, 
 and when the crop is obtained take from it the amount of 
 the Khiraj, together with what he has expended upon it, and 
 keep the remainder for the landlord. And Aboo Yoosuf 
 has said, that the Imam should lend the owner of the land 
 from the public treasury as much as will enable him to buy 
 cattle and implements of husbandry, and take from him a 
 deed, binding himself to cultivate the land, and when the 
 grain is ripe he may take from it the Khiraj, and what 
 he lends him will be a debt against the owner of the land. 
 He has also said, that if there be nothing in the public trea- 
 sury, he should deliver the land to one who will abide upon 
 it, and pay the Khiraj. When a landlord is unable to cul- 
 tivate his land, and the Imam has acted in the manner above- 
 mentioned, and subsequently the landlord's power and ability 
 to work and cultivate returns, the Imam should demand back 
 the land from the person in whose hands it may happen to 
 
 1 " The causes of inhibition are three : infancy, insanity, and 
 servitude." Hamilton's Hedaya, vol. iii., p. 468. In this the 
 three doctors agreed, but they differed as to " weakness of mind," 
 which Aboo Yoosuff and Moonummud thought a sufficient ground, 
 viewed with reference to the individual himself, but Aboo Huneefa 
 thought insufficient, unless when required for the public good, 
 as, for instance, in the case of an ignorant physician, &c. Ibid. 
 p. 473. 
 
16 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 be, and restore it to its owner, except only in the case of its 
 having been sold. (Moheet.) 
 
 When they When people subject to Khiraj 1 run away and abandon 
 
 the land al- their lands, Husn has related, as from Aboo Huneefa, that 
 
 together. J-^Q l mam ] las an option, and may if he please, cultivate the 
 
 land from the public treasury, when the produce will belong 
 
 to the Mooslims, or if he please he may deliver it to others, 
 
 and settle a rate upon it, of so much for each jureeb? and what 
 
 is taken from them will belong to the public treasury; and he 
 
 has related as from Aboo Yoosuf, that when people subject 
 
 to Khiraj die, 3 the Imam should deliver their lands in Mooza- 
 
 raut 9 or if he please, let them, and place the hire or rent in the 
 
 public treasury; and if they run away he should let the land, 
 
 and take the amount of the Khiraj from it, and keep the 
 
 remainder for the people, and restore it to them when they 
 
 return ; but he should not let the lands until the expiration of 
 
 the year in which they have run away. (Siraj-ool- Wuhhaj). 
 
 When it is The transfer of Zimmes from their own to other lands is 
 
 transfer valid, upon sufficient reason ; and it is a sufficient reason 
 
 Zimmees fatf, they have no courage nor strength, and are exposed 
 from their J > i . 
 
 own to to the attack of enemies, or that there is any fear of their 
 other lands ^ etra y uig t ^ Q secrets o f Mooslims to the enemy. But they 
 are entitled to the value of their lands, or to the like quantity 
 
 1 Literally " people of Khiraj" The Arabic word uhl (trans- 
 lated people) is frequently used to signify an individual; but 
 being here preceded by a verb in the singular, and followed by 
 other verbs in the plural, it is, I think, to be taken as a col- 
 lective noun, and may indicate a family, like the word kowm in 
 the case on page 14. It also seems that the land, like the estate, 
 a little further on, is subject to one entire Khiraj. 
 
 2 This corresponds with the explanation of the original word 
 mookataut, which is given in the translation of a firman by the 
 Emperor Aurungzebe, of which a copy will be found in the 
 Appendix. The word means literally " reciprocal cutting," as if 
 the Khiraj and the land were cut or divided into parts proportioned 
 to each other. 
 
 3 The word uhl is here also preceded by a verb in the singular, 
 and it is evident from the reference to " their lands," and the rest 
 of the sentence, that it is to be taken in a collective sense. The 
 case seems to suppose the total extermination of a family or set 
 of persons subject to Khiraj, and the absence of any heirs or 
 claimants of the land. 
 
TITHE AND TRIBUTE. 17 
 
 by measurement of other lands, and will be liable for the 
 Khiraj of the land to which they are transferred. There is 
 one report, however, according to which they would be 
 liable for the Khiraj of the land from which they had been 
 transferred ; but the first is more correct ; and their lands 
 are Khirajee, so that if afterwards occupied by a Mtioslim, 
 he would be liable for Khiraj. (Kafee.) 
 
 The lords or proprietors of a village in which there are Course to 
 Khirajee lands are dead or absent, and the villagers being ^ j ie W< 
 unable to pay its KJiiraj, wish to surrender it to the Sooltan 
 Sooltan; in such circumstances the Sooltan will do as we proprietors 
 
 have said, and if he wish to take the village to himself, 
 
 are dead 
 
 he will sell it to another, and buy it from the purchaser. 1 or absent, 
 
 (Futawa Kazee Khan.) ** 
 
 A family of persons purchase an estate, 2 in which there wish to 
 
 are orchards and lands; one of them purchasing the i t un 
 
 orchards, and the other the lands, and they wish to divide Khiraj of 
 
 the KJiiraj. It has been said, that if the Khiraj of the to be rate- 
 
 orchards be known, and the Khiraj of the lands be also & y di : 
 
 . videdwhen 
 
 known, they will remain subject to the same order as before purchased 
 
 the purchase; but if the Khiraj of the orchards be unknown, JJ]Jg ral 
 and the Khiraj of the estate has been one entire sum, and jointly. 
 it is known that the orchards were orchards originally, and 
 never known but as orchards, and the same is the case as 
 to the lands, regard will be had to the Khiraj of orchards 
 and of lands ; and if this be ascertained, the whole Khiraj 
 of the estate will be divided upon the parties, according to 
 the amount of their shares. (Futawa Kazee Khan.) 
 
 There is a village on the lands of which the Khiraj is Claim for 
 variously assessed, and a person whose land is subject to a 
 greater proportion of the Khiraj, demands an equalization 
 as between himself and the others. It is said that if it can- how to bT 
 not be ascertained whether the Khiraj was originally equal or a dJ usfced - 
 different, it should be left as before. 3 (Futawa Kazee Khan.) 
 
 1 Here also, it must be evident, that the villagers are not the 
 proprietors. Compare with ante, page 10, note 3. 
 
 2 Arab. Zeeut. 
 
 3 Here it would appear that the villagers are the proprietors, 
 
 D 
 
18 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 It is stated in some Futawa, that when a man converts 
 his Khirajee land into a tomb, or a corn exchange for 
 merchants, or into dwellings for the poor, the Kliiraj drops 
 or ceases. 1 
 
 When the When a Mooslim is allowed to fall into arrears for the 
 fallsmto Khiraj of his land, for two years, the whole of the arrear 
 
 arrear, the S h uld be taken from him, according to Aboo Yoosuf and 
 
 whole is 
 
 to be ex- Moohummud, but only the Khiraj of the current year, ac- 
 
 cording to Aboo Huneefa. Sheikh ool Islam has reported 
 to this effect in his lesser commentary on the Institutes, but 
 Sudur ool Islam, in a book on the Ooshr and Khiraj, has 
 given two reports from Aboo Huneefa, and has said that 
 what is correct is, that the whole should be taken. (Moheet.) 
 
 No Khiraj There is no Khiraj when water has over-flooded the land, 
 is due from . p . ., i,- , / TVT 7 ^ 
 
 land which o r 1S cut on trom it, or prevents its cultivation. (Aluhr-oolr 
 
 cannot be Paik.) Moohummud has related in the Nawadir, that when 
 cultivated, . 
 
 Ktiirajee land has been submerged in water, and the water has 
 
 subsided in time to allow of a second crop, before the en- 
 
 trance on a second year, and the owner neglects to cultivate 
 
 it, he is liable for the Khiraj, but that if the water has not 
 
 subsided in time to allow of a second crop before the en- 
 
 trance upon a second year, the Khiraj is not due. (Moheet.) 
 
 or when When a providential calamity happens to the crop, which 
 
 is disproved cou ld- n t he prevented, such as inundation, conflagration, 
 
 by any excessive cold, and the like, there is no Khiraj; but when the 
 
 tiaTcalT- calamity is not providential, and could have been prevented, 
 
 mit y' such as eating by apes, wild beasts, cattle, and the like, the 
 
 Khiraj does not drop; (and this is correct); and Sheikh ool 
 
 Islam has related that the loss of the crop, before it has 
 
 been reaped, causes the Khiraj to drop, but that its loss after 
 
 it has been reaped, does not cause the Khiraj to drop. 
 
 (Siraj-ool- Wuhhaj.) 
 
 "When Oo- In Ooshree land, when the crop has perished before 
 being reaped, the Ooshr drops, and if it have perished after 
 
 for they are liable to the Khiraj, and there is no one between them 
 and the sovereign. There is, however, nothing like a republic of 
 villagers, for they are evidently liable each for his own land. 
 1 The authority is not cited. 
 
TITHE AND TRIBUTE. 19 
 
 being reaped, so much of the Ooshr as corresponds to the destruction 
 share of the landlord drops, and so much of it as cor- 
 responds to the share of the cultivator 1 remains on the 
 liability of the landlord. And the Khiraj Mookasimah is in 
 the same predicament as the Ooshr, for what is due in both 
 cases is something out of the actual crop, and the Ooshr 
 differs only as to the objects on which it is expended. 2 This 
 is when the whole of the produce has perished; and if the 
 greater part has perished, and some remains, regard will be 
 had to what remains, and if what remains be equal to two 
 kufeezees and two dirhems, one kufeez and one dirhem are 
 due, and the Khiraj does not drop, and if less than this re- 
 mains, half the crop is due. (Futawa Kazee Khan.) Our 
 elders have said that what is proper in the case, is to look 
 first to what the man has expended on the land, and then 
 to deduct what has been expended from the produce, and 
 if any thing remain, to take from it as we have explained. 
 (Siraj-ool- Wuhhaj and Moheet.) 
 
 The Khiraj indeed drops with the loss of the crop, when 
 there does not remain enough of the year for one to cultivate 
 the land; but if so much does remain the Khiraj does not 
 drop; and tlje effect is the same, as if the first occurrence had 
 not taken place. And in like manner, with regard to an 
 orchard, when its fruit is taken away by any calamity, but 
 part only is taken away, while part remains, and the remain- 
 der amounts to twenty dirhems or more, ten dirhems are due ; 
 but if what remains do not amount to twenty dirhems, half 
 of what remains is due; and so also, in the case of vegeta- 
 bles. (Futawa Kazee Khan.) 
 
 It was praiseworthy in the conduct of the Khoosroes 3 that Praisewor- 
 when calamity overtook the crop of the Moozarea, they used duct^of the 
 to indemnify him for his seed and maintenance out of the Khoosroes. 
 treasury, and to say, " the Moozarea is our partner in profit, 
 how then, shall we not share with him in loss." And a 
 
 1 Arab. Akkar, from Akr digging. A digger or tiller of the ground. 
 
 2 It would seem that in other respects the Ooshr and mookasimah 
 Khiraj are subject to the same rules. 
 
 3 The Persian Dynasty that immediately preceded the Maho- 
 medan Conquest. 
 
20 
 
 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 How ara- 
 ble land is 
 to be as- 
 
 when 
 planted 
 with fruit 
 trees. 
 
 No Khiraj 
 
 on a forest, 
 though 
 abounding 
 with game, 
 or trees 
 not bearing 
 fruit. 
 
 Other cases 
 in which 
 Khiraj is 
 not due, 
 the land 
 being 
 generally 
 unproduc- 
 tive. 
 
 Mooslim Sooltan in such dispositions is superior to them. 1 
 ( Wujeez-ool-Kurdery.) 
 
 A man plants a vine in Khiraj land ; till the vine bear he 
 is liable for the Khiraj of arable land; and in like manner 
 if he should plant fruit trees he would be liable for the 
 Khiraj of arable land till the trees bear fruit. When the 
 vine arrives at maturity and bears fruit, if the value of the 
 fruit attain to twenty dirhems or more, he is liable for ten 
 dirhems ; if it be less than twenty he is liable to the extent 
 of half the produce; and if half the produce should not 
 amount to a kufeez and a dirhem, no abatement will be made 
 from the kufeez and dirhem, because he might have obtained 
 a crop of grain from the land. 
 
 If there be a forest on one's land abounding with game, 
 he is not liable for Khiraj. If there be in his land reeds or 
 tamarisks, or coniferous trees, or willows, or trees not bearing 
 fruit, it will be considered whether he can cut them down, 
 and make it bear grain, and if he fail to do so he will be 
 subject to Khiraj ; but if the land cannot be made fit for 
 this he is not liable for Khiraj. And if there be in the 
 midst of KJiirajee land some land out of which salt rises, 
 whether it be more or less, then in the same way, if he can 
 make it arable, and it is connected with Khiraj water, he is 
 liable for Khiraj ; but if it be not connected with Khiraj 
 water, or if there be land in the mountains unconnected 
 with water, Khiraj is not due for it. And if there be among 
 Khirajee land a piece of ground that is saltish, and does not 
 admit of being cultivated, Khiraj is not due for it. 2 (Futawa 
 Kazee Khan.) 
 
 1 It would seem from the above that the contract of Moozaraut, 
 though perhaps under another name, was familiar to the Persians 
 before the Mahomedan Conquest, and that there was no inter- 
 mediate proprietor between the sovereign and the Moozarea, or 
 cultivator. If the relation between the parties is to be determined 
 by the rules of Mahomedan Law, the sovereign must have been 
 the proprietor of the land, for the contract of Moozaraut, as 
 already explained, is a contract of co-partnership between a pro- 
 prietor of land and a cultivator. 
 
 2 These exemptions follow necessarily, from the principle that 
 the " cause of Khiraj is land when actually increasing or capable 
 of increase." See post, p. 23. 
 
TITHE AND TRIBUTE. 21 
 
 The time or season of liability to the Kkiraj is, according 
 to Aboo Huneefa, the beginning of the year, but subject 
 to the condition that the land remains in the hands of the 
 party, productive for a year, either actually or relatively. 1 
 (Zukheerah). 
 
 It is the duty of the ruler to place over the Khiraj a Ruler 
 person who will be kind to the people, and just to them in p ^ t a ap 
 
 the matter of their Khiraj. and to take from them the Kliirai kindsuper- 
 
 , , , intendent. 
 
 gradually, as the crops are produced, so that the whole may 
 
 be paid up by the end of the crop. By this is meant that 
 the Khiraj should be adjusted to the quantity of the crop; so 
 that if the land be sown with the spring and autumnal crops, 
 the superintendent should consider at the time of reaping the 
 spring crop, how much by guess or conjecture the land is 
 likely to bear for the autumnal crop, and if he should be of 
 opinion that the autumnal is likely to be equal to the spring 
 crop, he should make an equal division of the Khiraj, and 
 take half the Khiraj from the spring crop, and let half remain 
 over for the autumnal crop. And he should do in the same 
 way with pot-herbs; that is he should consider, and if the 
 herbs be of a kind that is cut five times in the year, he will 
 take at each time a fifth of the Khiraj., and if they are of a 
 kind that is cut four times he will take at each time a fourth 
 part of the Khiraj', and in like manner according to the 
 same analogy in other cases. (MoheeL) 
 
 When a man dies who is liable for Khiraj or Ooshr, it 
 will be taken from his estate, 2 and the KJiiraj will be taken 
 
 1 That is, I suppose, either till the actual completion of the year, 
 or the completion of the season by getting in the crops. 
 
 2 Not generally so far as regards the Ooshr, for that can be 
 taken only out of the particular thing (grain or other produce) if 
 in existence, upon which it is due; and the same is apparently 
 true of the Mookasimah Khiraj, which seems to be like the Ooshr 
 in all respects, except the purposes to which it is applied. The 
 Wuzeefa Khiraj is different from both, inasmuch as it is a debt 
 which binds the person, without being restricted to anything in 
 particular out of which it is to be paid. It may, therefore, be 
 deducted from the estate of a deceased person generally, but 
 the others cannot without his special direction by will. More- 
 over, the person who is liable for the Wuzeefa Khiraj may law- 
 
22 
 
 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 The Sool- when the crop has ripened, according to the difference of 
 lien on the countries ; and it is not lawful for the owner of Khiraj 
 
 Khiraj. 
 
 ma'Te 
 lawfully 
 
 to eat of tlieir P roduce til1 he nas P aid tne 
 (Futawa Kazee Khan.) Nor should one eat of the grain of 
 
 ^ OS ^ ^ ^ Q ^ s P^ ^ e s7ir '> and if ne should eat of it 
 he is responsible. And the Sooltan has the power of retain- 
 in g the S rain of Khirajee land till he has taken the Khiraj. 
 (Zuheereeah.) 
 
 Moohummud has related in the Nawadir, that a person 
 may lawfully advance the Khiraj of his land for one year 
 or two years ; and it is stated in the Mooutuha, that when 
 a man has advanced the Khiraj of his land, and the land 
 is afterwards submerged in water in the same year, he 
 should receive back what he paid of the Khiraj, or that it 
 should be accounted for to him in the Khiraj of the next year, 
 if he should cultivate the land. And it is related of Moo- 
 hummud, with regard to a man who gave the Khiraj of his 
 lands for two years, and it was afterwards overflowed, and 
 became part of the Tigris, that he said it ought to be re- 
 stored to him if still subsisting, but that if already laid out, 
 there is no help for him; meaning thereby that when expended 
 on the soldiers he could not have anything. (Mbheet.) 
 
 fully give bail or security for it, and may be imprisoned in 
 case of non-payment, which is not the case with the other kind 
 of Khiraj or the Ooshr. Kifayah, vol. iii., p. 288. 
 
ZUKAT ON FRUITS AND CROPS. 23 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 OF OOSHR AS THE ZUKAT 1 ON FRUITS AND CROPS. 
 [This Chapter is taken from the Futawa Alumgeeree, vol. i. p. 261.] 
 
 THIS is a positive duty, 2 and its cause is land increasing by Descrip - 
 an actual issue out of it, in opposition to Khiraj, the cause tlon< 
 of which is land either actually increasing, or capable of 
 increase ; for if land be capable, and not sown, Khiraj is due 
 for it, but not Ooshr. And if any calamity overtake the 
 crop, Ooshr is not due. A transfer of property is essential to 
 it; and the condition to be observed in paying it is the same 
 as has been already explained in regard to Zukat. 3 
 
 There are two conditions necessary to render a person Two con- 
 liable to Ooshr. The first is Ahleeut* that is, Islam, or being S|^ of 
 a Mooslim; (this is essential to its commencement, for it does to Ooshr. 
 not begin except with a Mooslim, without any difference of 
 
 1 Zukat may be generally described as a poor's rate, levied in 
 kind; in law it is defined to be " the giving of property to a poor 
 Mooslim, other than one of the family of Hashim, or his freed 
 man, for the sake of God, and in such a manner as to cut off the 
 giver from any participation in its benefits." Fut. Alum. vol. i. 
 p. 239. 
 
 2 Arab. Furz. Founded on the saying of the Prophet, " on what- 
 ever the earth produces there is Ooshr" Hidayah, vol. i. p. 569. 
 
 3 Viz. in the first chapter of the Book of Zukat. The condition 
 is a present intention at the time of actually paying or setting 
 apart property for the purpose. When a person, at the time 
 of bestowing anything in charity, if asked what he is paying, 
 is in a position to answer, without reflection, that is a present 
 intention ; but if he were to say, " what I have bestowed up to the 
 end of the year I intended to be on account of Zukat" that would 
 not be lawful. Fut. Alum. vol. i. p. 239. 
 
 4 Literally, worthiness or aptitude. 
 
24 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 opinion) 1 and knowledge of its being a duty. But as to 
 understanding and puberty, these are not conditions neces- 
 sary to liability ; for the lands of minors and insane persons 
 are liable to Ooshr, since it is a means of preserving 2 the land, 
 and therefore it is that the Imam is empowered to take 
 it forcibly; whereupon the owner of the land ceases to be 
 responsible for it, but in that case he has no reward. And 
 in like manner, if a person who is liable to Ooshr should die 
 while the grain is still in existence, the Ooshr may be taken 
 out of it, contrary to the case of Zukat generally. And 
 thus a right of property in the land is not a condition of 
 liability to Ooshr, for it is due on land under wukf, 3 or be- 
 longing to a Mazoon* or to a MooJcatib. 5 
 
 Second The second condition is that there be a fit and lawful sub- 
 
 ject, (by which is meant that the land is Ooshree, for there is 
 no Ooshr on the produce of Khirajee land,) and an existing 
 crop, and that the crop be such as is sown with a view or 
 design to some increase of the earth. (Buhr-oor-Raik.) 
 Hence there is no Ooshr upon wood, grass, reeds, tamarisk 
 " trees, or palm branches ; for these things bring no increase to 
 the land, but rather deteriorate it. If, however, any profit 
 should be derived from the osiers of willows, or from grass, 
 reeds, or the branches of palm trees, or if there be plane 
 
 1 Aboo Huneefa was of opinion that Ooshr can be received only 
 from a Mooslim. The other two did not go so far, but agreed 
 that it can commence only with a Mooslim, though having been 
 once imposed upon land, they thought that it may be subse- 
 quently received from a person of a different faith, to whom the 
 land is transferred. 
 
 2 Arab. Moonut. The above meaning is put upon the term by 
 the author of the Kifayah, who ascribes this virtue to the prayers 
 of the poor (on whom the Ooshr is expended) for assistance to the 
 people of Islam against infidels. In like manner Khiraj is moonut, 
 by reason of its being expended on soldiers, who repel the attacks 
 of enemies. Kifayah, vol. i. p. 474. 
 
 3 See ante, page 8, note 1. 
 
 4 Ante, page 7, note 5. 
 
 5 Ibid, note 4. It may be observed that Islam, understanding, 
 puberty, and complete property, (which includes right and posses- 
 sion), are all necessary to render a person liable to the Zukat 
 generally. 
 
XUKAT ON FKUITS AND CROPS. 25 
 
 or fir, or pistachio nut trees, on the ground, which are cut 
 down arid sold, Ooshr would be due on account of them. 
 (Moheet-oos-Surukhsee. ) 
 
 According to Aboo Hunefa, Ooshr is due on every pro- Ooshr is 
 duct of the earth, such as wheat, barley, millet, rice, seeds d " e JJ 
 of different kinds, pot herbs, odoriferous herbs, leaves, produce of 
 vegetables, sugar canes, wormwood, water melons, cucum- the S0ll> 
 bers, citruls, bazunjan, 1 saffron in the flower, and the like, 
 among things that bear fruit, 2 whether it be permanent or 
 not, and whether small in quantity or abundant. (Futawa 
 Kazee Khan). And it makes no difference whether the land 
 be watered by rain from the heavens, or by running water, 
 and whether the articles be measured by the wusk or not. 3 
 (Shurih-Tahavee). And it is due on flax, and also on its 
 seed, for each of them is a distinct object in the cultiva- 
 tion of the plant. (Shurih-ool-Mujma). It is likewise due 
 on nuts and almonds, cummin seed and coriander. (Mooz- 
 mirat). And Ooshr is due for honey when found in Ooshree 
 land, and in like manner, on manna, when it falls on the 
 green thorn in a person's land (Kliuzanut-ool-Mooftieen)\ and 
 on fruit collected from trees which do not belong to any one, 
 as trees in the mountains. (Zuheereeah). And there is no Excep- 
 Ooshr on what is only an accessory to the earth, such as palm ' 
 and other trees ; 4 nor on anything that issues from trees, as 
 
 1 Produce of the egg plant. 
 
 2 Aboo Huneefa is speaking only of Ooshree land; for if a 
 Mooslim be possessed of Khirajee land, he must pay the Kkiraj t 
 (ante p. 7,) and Ooshr and Khiraj are not payable for the same 
 land, (ante, p. 13). 
 
 3 The references to quantity and measure allude to differences 
 of opinion between Aboo Huneefa and his two disciples, who, 
 treating Ooshr as a branch of Zukat, considered that it is due only 
 on fruits of a permanent character, (such, for instance, as, like 
 dates and raisins, admit of being kept when dried,) which are of a 
 nature to be measured by the ivusk, and when they amount to 
 what is technically called a nisab, that is, five wusks. The 
 opinion of Aboo Huneefa is founded on the unqualified terms of 
 the saying of the prophet already quoted; the reasons for the 
 opinions of the other two will be found in Hamilton's Hedaya, 
 vol. i., p. 45. 
 
 4 Everything which has a stem or trunk, that is not cut down 
 
 E 
 
26 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 gum or liquid pitch, because to obtain these is not an object 
 for planting the trees. (Buhr-oor-Raik.) Nor is it due on 
 seeds fit only to be sown or used in medicine, such as the seed 
 of the water-melon, the aniseed, and sesame ; nor on hemp, 
 or fir trees, nor on the trees of the cotton, bazunjan, 
 frankincense, or fig. (KJmzanut-ooIrMooftien,) 
 
 If there be a fruit tree within a person's mansion, no 
 Ooshr is due for it. 1 (Shurih-ool-Mujma.) 
 
 Half Ooshr On land watered by the Persian or Arabian wheel, only 
 half Ooshr is due. If the land be watered sometimes by 
 running water, and at others by the Arabian wheel, regard 
 is to be had to the larger part of the year ; and if the times 
 be equal, half Ooshr is due. (Khuzanut-ool-Mooftien.) 
 Time when The time for Ooshr is that of the springing up of the seed 
 Ooskrcom- an( ^ appearance of the fruit, according to Aboo Huneefa. 2 
 mences. (Buhr-oor-Raik.*) If then a person should advance the 
 Ooshr of his land before the sowing, it would not be lawful ; 
 and if he advance it after the sowing, and after the plant has 
 sprung up, it would be lawful ; but if he advance it after 
 the sowing, and before the plant has sprung up, it would, 
 apparently, be unlawful. With regard to fruit, if a person 
 should advance the Ooshr after its appearance, it is lawful, 
 but before its appearance it is unlawful, according to the 
 Zahir Rewayut. 3 (Shurih Tahavee.) 
 
 till it becomes a tree, is an accessory to the land, and is therefore 
 included in a sale of it; while deciduous plants, and generally 
 everything which is not permanent, are not included. Moohum- 
 mudan Law of Sale , (Baillie) p. 56. 
 
 1 The Arabic word for mansion (dar) is denned to be a place 
 comprehended within an enclosure. (Hamilton's Hedaya, vol. ii, 
 p. 502); and neither Ooshr nor Khiraj is due for the land of a 
 mansion, see post, page 28, note 1. 
 
 2 An actual transfer of property is essential to Ooshr, as 
 already observed, that is, the obligation cannot be satisfied with- 
 out a transfer, but this is impossible with regard to things not in 
 existence; accordingly the sale of seed, before it has sprung up, 
 or fruit, before its appearance, is unlawful. Moohummudan Law 
 of Sale, (Baillie), page 141. 
 
 3 The obligation to Ooshr ceases with the loss of the 'produce, 
 as will be presently seen; and if the Ooshr be paid in anticipa- 
 tion, the party advancing it would apparently be entitled to take 
 
ZUKAT ON FRUITS AND CROPS. 27 
 
 Ooshr drops or ceases with the loss of the produce from Failure of 
 any other cause than the act of the owner, and when the 
 loss is partial, it ceases in proportion to the loss. When 
 destroyed by any other than the proprietor, he is to take 
 compensation from the destroyer, and pay the Ooshr; and 
 if destroyed by himself, he is responsible for the Ooshr, 
 which becomes a debt for which he is liable ;* but it falls by 
 the apostacy and death of the proprietor without a will, after 
 he has destroyed the property. 2 (Buhr-oor-Raik.) 
 
 A Toogohlibee 3 having Ooshree land is liable to a double Double 
 Ooshr; and if a Zimmee purchase the land from him, it remains pa y ab Y e s 
 in the same condition, according to them, 4 and the effect is by a 
 the same, according to Aboo Huneefa, when a Mooslim 
 purchases the land from the Tooghlibee, or he himself adopts 
 the faith of Islam; and it makes no difference whether the 
 duplicity be original or subsequently induced. And sup- 
 posing a Mooslim to be possessed of land which he sells to a 
 Zimmee who is not of the Tooghlibee tribe, and the Zimmee 
 takes possession of it, he would be liable to JKTiiraj, according 
 to Aboo Huneefa; bnt if the land be taken from him by 
 another Mooslim, under a claim of Shoofaa or pre-emption, 
 or if it should be returned to the seller on account of some 
 
 credit for it in his next payment, as is the case with Zukat 
 generally. But if the advance be irregularly made, it must be 
 considered as a mere voluntary payment, for which the party 
 making it could take no credit in the event of loss. Put. Alum. 
 vol. i., p. 247. 
 
 1 Otherwise it is not a debt, and therefore cannot be paid out 
 of the general assets of his estate, without a special direction by 
 his will. See Kifayah, vol. iii. p. 265, where the author is 
 speaking generally of Zukat. 
 
 2 Islam is essential to the liability, which therefore ceases upon 
 apostacy; according to the two disciples, an apostate is competent 
 to make a will. Fut. Alum. vol. ii. p. 359. 
 
 3 The Tooghlibees were a tribe of Christian Arabs, on the con- 
 fines of the Koman territories, on whom Omar wished to impose 
 the jizyut or capitation tax, but on their threatening to join the 
 enemy he entered into a treaty with them, by which it was agreed 
 that they should pay double of what was payable by Mooslims. 
 Kifayah, vol. i. p. 501. 
 
 4 The word being in the plural, and not the dual, I suppose it 
 means "them all," viz: the three doctors. 
 
28 
 
 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 Effect of 
 conversion 
 by a Moos- 
 lim, of his 
 mansion 
 into a gar- 
 den. 
 
 Similar 
 conversion 
 by a Zim- 
 mee. 
 
 Ooshr 
 water and 
 Khiraj 
 water. 
 
 Lease of 
 
 defect in the sale, it would become Ooshree, as before. Land 
 in the hands of a minor or woman of the Tooghlibees is the 
 same as if it were in the hands of a man ; and nothing is due 
 by a Mujoosee on his mansion. 1 (Hidayah.) 
 
 If a Mooslim convert his mansion into a garden, its burden 
 or liability is determined by its water; if watered by Ooshr 
 water, it becomes Ooshree, and if by Khiraj water, it becomes 
 Kliirajee. This is different from the case of a Zimmee, who, 
 when he converts his mansion into a garden, is liable to 
 Khiraj ', however it may be watered, but his mansion remains 
 free. 2 (Tubyeen). The rule is the same with regard to 
 sepulchres. (Buhr-oor-Raik.) And if a Mooslim or a 
 Zimmee were to water his land at one time with Ooshr water 
 and at another with Kliiraj water, the former would be liable 
 to Ooshr, and the latter to Khiraj. (Miaraj-ood-Duraya). 
 
 Ooshr water is the water of wells dug and fountains 
 springing up in Ooshree land; so also rain from the heavens, 
 and the water of great seas, 3 is Ooshree. (Moheet.) The 
 water of canals excavated by the Persians, 4 and the water 
 of wells dug in Khirajee land is Khirajee. And as to the 
 water of the Syhoon, (Jaxartes), the Tigris, and the Eu- 
 phrates, it is Khirajee., according to Aboo Huneefa, and 
 AbooYoosuf. 5 (Kafee.) 
 
 If one should let Ooshree land to hire, the lessor would be 
 
 1 Because Omar made all dwellings entirely exempt. Hidayah, 
 vol. i. p. 537; Translation, vol. i. p. 51. 
 
 2 That is the actual dwelling remains exempt. 
 
 3 The Arabic word Buhar, which means any large bodies of 
 water, is thus qualified in the Hidayah " which do not enter under 
 the power of any one;" vol. i. p. 537; Translation, vol. i. p. 51. 
 
 4 The canals alluded to are probably those by which the waters 
 of the Tigris and Euphrates are distributed over the Sowad of 
 Irak. They were originally excavated, according to the author 
 of the Lub-ool-Tareekh, by Manusheher, an ancient king of Persia, 
 of the Peshdadian dynasty, for the convenience of the people, 
 though afterwards converted into a source of public revenue. 
 D'Herbelot Biblioth. Orient, and Sir John Malcolm's History of 
 Persia, vol. ii. p. 473. 
 
 5 Moohummud thought the waters of these rivers to be Ooshree, 
 because no one can prohibit their use. Hidayah, vol. ii. p. 537. 
 
ZUKAT ON FRUITS AND CROPS. 
 
 29 
 
 liable for the Ooshr, according to Aboo Hunefa, but the tenant, Ooshree 
 
 according to the other two. (Khoolasa.) Should the crop 
 
 perish before it is reaped, the lessor would not be liable for 
 
 the Ooshr, but if it should perish after being reaped, the Ooshr 
 
 would not drop. According to the other two, however, 
 
 whether the crop perish before or after being reaped, it 
 
 would alike perish, with whatever might be on it. (Shurih 
 
 Tahavee). If one should lend his land to a Mooslim, the Loan of 
 
 borrower would be liable for the Ooshr, but if he lend it to 
 
 an infidel, the lender would be liable, according to Aboo 
 
 Huneefa. According to the other two, however, the infidel 
 
 would be liable, with this difference between them, that the 
 
 liability would, in the opinion of Moohummud, be limited to 
 
 a single Ooshr, while in that of Aboo Yoosuf it would extend 
 
 to two Ooshrs. (Moheet-oos-Surukhsee.) In a case of Moo- Moozaraut 
 
 zaraut, 1 the burden would fall upon both parties, in proportion 
 
 to their shares, according to the two, but in the opinion of 
 
 Aboo Huneefa, the owner of the land would alone be liable; 
 
 the liability for his own share being specific, but for that of 
 
 the Moozarea or husbandman, indeterminate. (Buhr-oor- 
 
 Raik.) And if the crop should perish, the Ooshr would 
 
 drop in regard to both parties, according to the two; and so 
 
 also, in the opinion of Aboo Huneefa, when the loss occurs 
 
 before the crop is reaped; but if it should not occur till after 
 
 the reaping, he was of opinion that the owner's liability in 
 
 regard to the share of the Moozarea would not drop, while 
 
 it would drop in regard to his own share. And supposing 
 
 that another person should destroy the crop before it is reaped, 
 
 but after considerable labour had been expended upon it, or 
 
 should steal it, there would be no Ooshr till the destroyer 
 
 make compensation, whereupon the owner would become 
 
 liable for a tenth part of the consideration; but according to 
 
 the other two, both parties would be liable. (Moheet-oos- 
 
 Surukhsee.) And if Ooshree land be usurped and sown by 
 
 the usurper, the owner would not be liable for the Ooshr, 
 
 unless the land were damaged by the sowing, but if it were 
 
 See ante, page 8, note 6. 
 
30 
 
 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 Sale of 
 Ooshree 
 land. 
 
 Sale of 
 grain sub- 
 ject to 
 Ooshr. 
 
 damaged by the sowing, the burden of the Ooshr would be 
 on the owner of the land. 1 (Khoolasa.) 
 
 When Ooshree land, in which there is seed that has already 
 ripened, is sold with the seed, or the crop is sold by itself, 
 the seller, and not the purchaser, is liable for the Ooshr; and 
 if the crop be pot-herbs, and it is sold, and the herbs are 
 immediately cut by the purchaser, the seller is liable, but if 
 they are left till ripe the Ooshr is on the purchaser. (Shurih 
 Tahavee.) 
 
 When a person has sold grain which is subject to Ooshr, 
 the Moosuddik, or alms-collector, may take his Ooshr from the 
 purchaser, though the parties should have separated ; 2 or if he 
 please he may take it from the seller. And suppose that the 
 person had sold the grain for more than its value, and the 
 purchaser had not yet taken possession, the Moosuddik might 
 then take either a tenth of the grain or a tenth of the price, 
 at his pleasure ; but if the seller had given it at a price 
 much below what men would generally take for it in the 
 circumstances, the Moosuddik would have no alternative but 
 to take a tenth of the grain; 3 and. if the seller should 
 destroy the grain, the Moosuddik may take from him a tenth 
 of similar grain, unless he prefer to give the amount of its 
 value out of the price. And if the purchaser should destroy 
 it, the Moosuddik has the option of making either the seller 
 or the purchaser responsible for a tenth of similar grain; 
 for both of them have been instrumental in destroying what 
 was his right. If grapes be sold, the Ooshr is to be taken 
 from the price ; and in like manner, if they were converted 
 
 1 It may be observed on this and the parallel passage on page 
 8, that a usurper is not responsible for the use of the thing 
 usurped (Hedaya, vol. iii. p. 550) ; consequently he is not liable 
 for rent. But if usurped land be damaged by the cultivation of 
 it, the usurper must compensate for the damage. (Ibid, page 5 2 7.) 
 In this case, then, he has something against which the Ooshr or 
 Khiraj may be set; which seems to be the ground of the dis- 
 tinction. 
 
 2 That is, though the sale be completed, which it would be by 
 separation of the parties. 
 
 3 That is, being a public officer, it would be a breach of trust 
 if he took anything much less than the value. 
 
ZUKAT ON FRUITS AND CROPS. 31 
 
 into juice, and then sold, the seller would be liable for a tenth 
 of the price of the juice. (Molieet-oos-SuruksJiee.) 
 
 The hire of labourers, the keep of cattle, the expense of No allow- 
 
 digging channels, or the hire of a keeper, &c., are not to made for 
 
 be taken into account; and the proper rate, whether a tenth expenses 
 
 of cultiva- 
 
 or a half, is to be deducted from the gross produce of the tion, &c. 
 earth. (Buhr-oor-Raik.} 
 
 No part of grain subject to Ooshr is to be consumed until Ooshr must 
 
 the Ooshr is paid. (Zuheereeah.) But if the Ooshr be sepa- ducted 
 
 rated, it is lawful to consume the remainder; and Aboo before con- 
 
 Huneefa has said that if another person should eat any part of any part 
 
 of the fruit or grain, the owner is answerable for the Ooshr. ^^^^i 
 (Moheet-oos-Surukhsee.) 1 it. 
 
 1 This branch of the Zukat, together with that on flocks and 
 herds, &c., (ante, p. 12, note 5,) is applicable generally to the 
 following persons and objects. 1st, Fakeers, or persons who have 
 property not exceeding a nisab in quantity, after the supply of 
 their own wants; 2nd, Miskeens, or persons entirely destitute; 
 3rd, Amils, or officers appointed to collect alms and tithes ; pro- 
 vided they do not belong to the family of Hashim ; 4th, Rikab, or 
 assistance to Mookatibs, to complete their ransoms ; 5th, Debtors 
 who do not possess property above a nisab, clear of their debts ; 
 6th, Subeel oollah, or the service of God, as enabling poor persons 
 to perform the duties of jihad and hujj, or religious warfare and 
 pilgrimage ; and 7th, Travellers who are cut off from their means 
 of support. Fut. Alum. vol. i. p. 263. 
 
32 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 OF THE IMPOSITION OF TITHE AND TKIBUTE UPON LAND. 
 
 [This Chapter is composed of extracts from different parts of the Book of 
 Siyur, Futawa Alumgeeree, vol. ii/J 
 
 Definition. Siyur 1 is jihad* that is, a call to the true Religion, and 
 war with those who refuse or hesitate to submit to it, either 
 When per- in their persons or their property. Two things are required 
 ' to justify it; one of these is the refusal of the enemy 'to 
 accept the true religion when called upon, and the absence of 
 any special protection granted to them, or subsisting treaty 
 between them and us; and the other is a reasonable hope 
 that the people of Islam will be endowed with courage and 
 strength to contend with them and their allies. When there 
 is no ground for expecting this, war is unlawful, as being a 
 manifest throwing away of life. The effect or consequence 
 to the individual, is the discharge of a duty incumbent upon 
 him in this world, and obtaining the reward of felicity in the 
 world to come, as in all other acts of devotion. (Moolieet- 
 oos-Surukhsee.) 3 
 
 Course to When the Imam has determined on entering into the 
 on entering enemy's country, it is incumbent on him to number his armies, 
 an enemy's horse, and foot, and write down their names. (Shurih 
 Tahavee.) And when the Mooslims have entered the enemy's 
 Call to country, and have surrounded a city or fortress, they are to 
 Islam. call the inhabitants to Islam; if they comply with the call, 
 
 1 Plural of Seerut, custom or institution, but applied in law to 
 the particular institutes or rules by which Mooslims are guided 
 in their intercourse with people of a different religion. 
 
 2 Literally, waging war. 
 
 3 Put. Alum. vol. ii. p. 266. 
 
FIRST IMPOSITION OF TITHE AND TRIBUTE., 33 
 
 the Mooslims are to desist from fighting with them; if they 
 refuse, they are to be called upon to pay the Jizyut or capi- 
 tation tax. 1 (Hidayah.) And if they accept they are entitled to 
 what we are entitled to, and are subject to what we are subject 
 to. (Kunz.) This is to be understood of persons from whom 
 the Jizyut may be lawfully accepted ; for those from whom 
 it is not lawful to accept the Jizyut, are not to be called upon 
 to pay it. (Tibyeen.) Infidels are of different kinds. There Different 
 is one kind from whom it -is unlawful to accept the Jizyut 
 and to whom the condition of Zimmut cannot be conceded. 
 These are the associators 2 of Arabia, who have no sacred 
 writings, and when we conquer them there is no alternative 
 for their men, but the sword or Islam, and their women and 
 children are Fee. 3 There is another kind from whom it is 
 lawful to accept the Jizyut according to general agreement; 
 and these, among people who have sacred writings, are Jews 
 and Christians, whether Arab or of any other nation; and from 
 Majoosees, also, it is lawful according to all opinions to take 
 the Jizyut, whether they be Arabs or not There is a third 
 kind with regard to whom there is a difference of opinion as 
 to the lawfulness of accepting Jizyut from them; and these 
 are associators not of Arabia, who have neither any sacred 
 writings nor are Majoosees; but according to us it is lawful 
 to accept the Jizyut from them. (Moheet.) 
 
 It is not lawful to fight with those who have not received 
 the invitation to Islam, without calling upon them. (Hidayah. ) 
 
 1 It is of two kinds. When imposed on a people under capitu- 
 lation, and with mutual consent, its amount is whatever may be 
 agreed upon, and it cannot be afterwards increased. When imposed 
 on a conquered people it is fixed by law at forty-eight dirhems per 
 annum for the rich, twenty-four dirhems for persons of middling 
 condition, and twelve dirhems for the poor, payable in each case 
 monthly, in equal portions. Put. Alum. vol. ii. p. 347. 
 
 2 Persons who associate any one other object of worship with 
 the Supreme Deity. The term, unless qualified, would include 
 Christians, as well as idolaters. 
 
 3 What is taken from infidels by force and violence in actual 
 warfare, is called Ghuneemut, or plunder; what is taken from 
 them when there is no actual war is Fee, and it includes Jizyut and 
 Khiraj. Fut. Alum. vol. ii. p. 390. 
 
34 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 If they refuse Islam and the Jizyut, the assistance of God is 
 to be called for against them, and they are to be warred 
 with to the last extremity. (IJitiyar-Shurih-ool-Mookhtar). 1 
 How to be Moohummud has said that when the inhabitants of a 
 when they c ity belonging to the enemy embrace the faith before the 
 voluntarily Mooslims have prevailed against them, they are entirely free, 
 and no legal means remain of assailing them, their children, 
 their women, or property, and the Ooshr, not the Khiraj, is 
 to be imposed upon their lands. In like manner, if the in- 
 habitants of the city become Zimmees or subjects, by sub- 
 mitting to the Jizyut without embracing the faith, before they 
 are conquered by the Mahomedans, they are equally free 
 as to their persons, their families, and properties, with this 
 exception, that here the Khiraj and not the Ooshr is to be 
 imposed on their lands, and the Jizyut to be laid on their 
 When they heads. But if the Mussulmans prevail against them, and they 
 
 qvr POTl- 
 
 quered. then embrace the faith, the Imam has an option with regard 
 to them, and may if he please divide them, and their pro- 
 perty among the soldiers. 2 If such be his intention after the 
 inhabitants have declared their profession of the faith, he 
 ought to deduct a fifth for the benefit of orphans, the poor, 
 and travellers, and make division of the remaining four-fifths 
 among the soldiers, and impose the Ooshr upon the lands. 
 But he may, if he please, bestow his grace upon the in- 
 habitants who embrace the faith, and deliver up to them their 
 persons, their families, and property, and impose the Ooshr, 
 or fix a Khiraj upon their lands, as he may deem proper. 
 When the inhabitants, after being conquered, refuse to em- 
 brace the faith, the Imam is at liberty to reduce them to 
 slavery, and divide them and their property among the sol- 
 diers. If he intend to adopt this course, he is first to take 
 a fifth from the whole for the purposes above-mentioned, and 
 
 1 The authorities in the two last paragraphs are taken from 
 Fut. Alum., vol. ii. p. 273-4. 
 
 2 The authority for this is derived from the conduct of the 
 Prophet with regard to Kheiber ; but his example is not considered 
 to form an imperative rule for all occasions, " or why was it 
 departed from by the Khufeef Omar in the case of Irak, with the 
 general consent of the companions?" Kifayah, vol. ii. p. 723. 
 
FIKST IMPOSITION OF TITHE AND TRIBUTE. 35 
 
 then to divide the remainder among the soldiers, and to im- 
 pose the Ooshr upon the land ; or he may if he please slay 
 the adult males, and divide the women, the children, and 
 property among the soldiers. But he may also, if he please, 
 grant the inhabitants their lives and freedom, together with 
 their property, and impose the Jizyut on their necks and the 
 KUraj on their lands 1 (Moheet.) And in this there is no 
 difference, whether the water be Ooshree, like water of the 
 heavens, fountains and wells, or Khirajee, as water of the 
 canals dug by the Persians. (Gliayut-ool-Buyan). And 
 when the Imam has conquered a country belonging to the 
 enemy, and has divided it and its inhabitants among the 
 soldiers, he cannot afterwards, if so inclined, grant the peo- 
 ple their persons and lands ; nor when he has once bestowed 
 these upon them, can he^ afterwards if so inclined, make a 
 division of them. (Moheet.)* 
 
 1 As was done by Omar with regard to iheSowad of Irak, with 
 the concurrence of the companions. It is related of Omar on 
 this occasion, that he consulted the companions as to the lands, 
 and that some said, " They are plunder, divide them among the 
 soldiers," while others were of a different opinion; whereupon 
 Omar postponed the matter, and turned to the Kooran. When 
 the morrow came, he said, u I have found in the Book of God 
 what will suffice without your opinions." He then quoted the 
 verse, " and those that come after them, &c.," saying " if I were 
 to divide the land among you, what would there be for those who 
 come after you." Whereupon they all agreed to what he said, 
 with the exception of a small number, including Belal, so in- 
 significant that their opposition is disregarded, and Omar's de- 
 cision is, therefore, said to have been with the concurrence of the 
 companions. Hidayah and Kifayah, vol. ii. p. 723. 
 
 2 The authorities in the last paragraph are taken from the Fut. 
 Alum. vol. ii. p. 292. 
 
36 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 OF THE KHOOMS, 1 OR FIFTH ON MINES AND BURIED TREASURE. 
 
 [This Chapter is taken from the Futawa Alumgeeree, vol. i. p. 259.] 
 
 Three The products of mines 2 are of three kinds. They are 
 
 products either fusible 3 in the fire, or fluid in their own nature, 4 or 
 
 from mines ne ither fusible nor fluid. The fusible are such as gold, 
 
 Metals. silver, iron, tin or lead, brass and copper ; and upon these a 
 
 fifth is due, 5 (Tukzeeb;) whether they are extracted by a 
 
 free person, or a slave, a Zimmee, a youth, or a woman ; and 
 
 what remains belongs to the taker. 6 When an alien Moos- 
 
 tamin works without permission of the Imam, he is not 
 
 entitled to anything ; and if he work with such permission, 
 
 he has whatever may be agreed upon; and it is alike 
 
 whether he find in Ooshree or Khirajee land. (Moheet-oos- 
 
 1 This is a branch of the Zukat, though restricted at the present 
 day to the following special objects; viz., orphans, the poor, and 
 travellers. Futawa Alumgeeree, vol. i. p. 268. 
 
 2 Arab. Muadin, pi. of mddin, literally a resting place, from a 
 verb that signifies to stay, or to be always in a place. 
 
 3 Arab. Moontuba, literally tractable or yielding. 
 
 4 Arab, maee, from ma, water. 
 
 5 The authority for this is the answer of the prophet when 
 asked as to treasure found in the Adee war. " Upon it," (said 
 he) and " upon rikaz there is a fifth." From his conjoining rikaz 
 to something buried in the earth, it is inferred that he meant by 
 it mddin, or things deposited by nature, as well as those con- 
 cealed by man. The primary signification of rikaz is establishing, 
 and it is even more applicable to things established by nature in 
 the earth, as component parts of the soil, than to things casually 
 deposited in it. 
 
 6 Arab, akhiz, which may either be the proprietor or a casual 
 finder, according as the mine or treasure is found in owned or 
 unowned land. 
 
FIFTH ON MINES AND BURIED TREASURE. 37 
 
 Surukhsee.) When two men work together in the search 
 for treasure, 1 and one of them lights upon it, it belongs to 
 the actual finder; but when a person hires labourers to work 
 in a mine, the hirer is entitled to whatever may be found. 
 (Buhr-oor-Raiti). With regard to fluid products, they are Fluid pro- 
 such as bitumen or pitch, naphtha, and salt. And those that ducts - 
 are neither fusible nor fluid, are such as quicklime, plaster, 
 jewels, and yakoots? upon which nothing is due. 3 (Tuhzeeb.} 
 On quicksilver a fifth is due. (Moheet-oos-Surukhsee.) 
 
 Nothing is due, according to Aboo Huneefa, on a mine 
 that one finds in his own mansion, and his own land ; 4 but 
 the other two have said that something is due. 5 ( Tubyeen). 
 
 1 The original word here is rikaz, and it includes both natural 
 and artificial deposits, as already mentioned. 
 
 2 The yakoot comprehends, I think, the ruby, sapphire, and 
 oriental topaz. 
 
 3 The authority is limited to the products that are neither 
 fusible nor fluid, though, I think, intended by the compilers 
 to cover those that are naturally fluid; and it is expressly 
 stated in the Kifayah (on the authority of the Eezah,) that nothing 
 is due upon them, because they are like water, (vol. i. p. 521). 
 The same doctrine is stated in the Hidayah^ but it seems 
 limited to fountains of bitumen or pitch, &c., in Ooshree land. 
 (Translation, vol. i. p. 52). 
 
 4 Aboo Huneefa's opinion is here given without any qualifica- 
 tion, but it seems from the Hidayah, (Translation, vol. i. p. 41,} 
 that there are contradictory reports of it so far as relates to a 
 mine found in one's land. The reason why he may have distin- 
 guished between such a mine, and one found within the precincts 
 of a mansion, is thus stated in the Kifayah, (vol. i. p. 523.) 
 " When the Imam gives a man his mansion, he gives it to him 
 quite clear, cutting off all others from any participation in it ; but 
 this is not the case with land, for when land is given, it is not 
 absolutely cleared from the rights of all others, the Khiraj being, 
 in fact, imposed upon it." 
 
 5 That is, a fifth is due, and their opinion seems to be the 
 law; for it is said in the Hidayah that a fifth is due on a mine 
 of gold, silver, &c., whether found in Khirajee or Ooshree land. 
 (Translation, vol. i. p. 39.) Nothing is said of the remaining 
 four-fifths; but the .whole being constituent parts of the soil, 
 there is no doubt that they belong to the proprietor. Mines and 
 minerals are accordingly included in a sale of land, and pass to 
 the purchaser without special mention. Moohummudan Law of 
 Sale, (Baillie,) p. 54. 
 
38 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 Buried If a person should find buried treasure 1 within the 
 
 Downed" 1 Mooslim territory, in land that does not belong to any one, 
 land. as for instance, in an extensive desert, without water ; and if 
 
 it bear the impression of a Mussulman people, as for instance, 
 a legend bearing testimony to the faith, it is to be treated as 
 trove, 2 but if it bear the impress of the people of ignorance, 3 
 as for instance, if it consist of dirJiems bearing the sign of 
 the cross, or the figure of an idol, a fifth is due upon it, and 
 the remaining four-fifths belong to the finder. (Moheet-oos- 
 Surukhsee.) And if there be any doubt as to the coinage, 
 from there being no sign impressed upon it, it is to be 
 accounted jahike, or of the times of ignorance. (Kafee.) It 
 makes no difference whether the finder be a minor or adult, 
 free or a slave, Mooslim or a Zimmee ; but if he be an alien 
 Moostamin, nothing is to be given to him unless he work 
 with the Imam's permission, under a condition for a propor- 
 tionate division of the profits, in which case, he would be 
 In proprie- bound to render according to the conditions. (Moheet.) And 
 if the finding take place in land that is owned by some one, 
 all are agreed that it is liable to a fifth, but they differ *as to 
 the remaining four-fifths ; Aboo Huneefa and Moohummud 
 being of opinion that they belong to the original grantee. 4 
 (Shurih Tahavee). And it is stated in the Futawa Atabeeah, 
 that if the original grantee were a Zimmee, he would not be 
 entitled to anything ; but if it be not known who was the 
 original grantee, or if there be no heirs of the original 
 grantee, the four-fifths are to be considered as belonging to 
 the nearest known proprietor, being a Mooslim; (Tatar 
 Khaneeah^) or his heirs; (Buhr-oor-Raik and Shurili Taha- 
 
 1 Arab. Kunz, which is strictly limited to artificial deposits. 
 
 2 After being duly advertised, if no owner appears, it should 
 be applied in charity, or paid into the Beit-ool-mal. See ante, 
 p. 12, note 5. 
 
 3 All people not Mahomedan. 
 
 4 Called the Sahib-ool-Khuttut, or Mookhuttut-le-hoo ; the person 
 on whom the Imam bestowed the land originally, at the period of 
 subjugation. (Hamilton's Hedaya, vol. i. p. 42.) It is to be ob- 
 served that concealed treasures are not included in a sale of land, 
 and do not pass to the purchaser. Moohummudan Law of Sale, p. 53. 
 
FIFTH ON MINES AND BURIED TREASURE. 39 
 
 vee;) or failing these, to the Beit-ool-Mal. -(Moheet-oor- 
 Surukhsee.) 
 
 If a Mooslim should find buried treasure, 1 or a mine in Treasure 
 
 , , , . or a mine 
 
 an enemy's country, in land not owned by any one, it f oun a b y a 
 belongs to the finder, and no fifth is due for it; but if he ^ a n slim 
 find it in land, the property of an individual among them, enemy's 
 and if he entered into their territory under protection, he c 
 should restore it to them. Suppose, however, that he does 
 not restore it, but brings it out with him into the Mooslim 
 territory, in that case he is indeed the proprietor of it, 
 but cannot lawfully turn it to his own account ; and if he 
 should sell it the purchaser would be under a like disability 
 (Shurih Tahavee). The proper course would be to lay it 
 out in charity. (Buhr-oor-Raiti). But if he had entered 
 the territory without permission, the whole is his own with- 
 out even the deduction of a fifth (Mooheet-oos-Surukhsee). Armour, 
 Armour, instruments, household goods, stones of rings, instru- 
 
 fe } ments, &c. 
 
 and merchandize are in this respect like buried treasure; 2 like buried 
 
 insomuch that they are liable to a fifth. (Tubyeen.) treasure. 
 
 There is nothing due upon what may be taken out of the taken out 
 sea, as ambergris, pearls, and fish. (Futawa Kazee Khan.) 
 
 Nor is there a fifth on turquoise stones found in the moun- to any 
 tarns. (Hidayah.J 
 
 1 Eikaz. 2 Kunz. 
 
 3 See Translation, vol. i. p. 43. The reason assigned is the 
 saying of the Prophet, " There is no khooms on stones." 
 
40 
 
 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 OF THE CULTIVATION OF WASTE LANDS. 1 
 
 [This Chapter, with the included Section, forms one entire Book in the 
 Futawa Alumgeeree, vol. v. p. 574.] 
 
 Descrip- Dead or waste land, is land on the outside of a town, 2 for 
 wast f which there is no owner, nor any one who has a particular 
 right in it. What is situated within a town cannot, then, be 
 waste; and in like manner, land on the outside of a town, if 
 it be of use or advantage to the inhabitants, in supplying 
 them with wood or pasturage, is not waste ; insomuch that 
 the Imam has not the power of cutting it off. And in the 
 same manner, salt or pitch lands, or the like, which are in- 
 dispensable to Mahomedans, are not waste, and the Imam 
 cannot lawfully cut them off in favour of any person in par- 
 ticular. But is it a necessary condition, that it shall be dis- 
 tant from cultivated land? Tahavee has made this a condi- 
 tion, but it is not so in the Zaliir Reivayut, so that a sea near 
 a town, the waters of which have subsided, or a great marsh, 
 the waters of which have subsided, and which has no owner, 
 would be waste according to the Zahir Rewayut, but not so, 
 
 1 Arab. IJiya-ool-muwat. Literally, giving life to the dead. The 
 figure is too strong for frequent repetition in the English language, 
 and the word " cultivating " does not always indicate the operation 
 intended, as will be seen from the definition given a little further 
 on. As that which is dead is supposed to have lived at one time, 
 the word "reclaiming," which is sometimes applied to the recovery 
 of land from a state of waste, seems to me to render the meaning 
 of the general phrase, as well as could be done by a more literal 
 translation of it. I will, therefore, generally make use of this word 
 as better suited to the act of reducing waste to a state of property. 
 
 2 From bu-luduj he abode in or made his residence. 
 
CULTIVATION OF WASTE LANDS. 41 
 
 according to a report of Aboo Yoosuff, on which the opinion 
 of Tahavee is founded. If then, waste be a name for what 
 is of no use, land which has no owner, and in which no one 
 has any particular right, and which is of no use, is waste, 
 whether it be distant from a town not. (Budayali^) Qoodooree 
 has said that what is Adee?- or has been long desolate, and 
 is without a proprietor, or if it ever was appropriated within 
 the time of Islam, its owner is unknown, 2 and the land itself 
 lies at such a distance from any village, that if a person 
 were to stand on the nearest limit of cultivated land, and 
 cry out, his voice would not be heard in it, is waste; and 
 Kazee Fakhr-ood-deen has said, that what has been said is 
 most correct, that when a man, standing on the verge of the 
 cultivated land of a village, cries out at the pitch of his voice, 
 whatever place his voice reaches to is to be considered as 
 within the confines 3 of the cultivated land, because the people 
 of the village have need of so much for pasture to their cattle, 
 and for other purposes, and that what is beyond this is waste, 
 when it has no known owner. Aboo Yoosuf has made 
 distance from a village, to be determined as aforesaid, a 
 necessary condition; but, according to Moohummud, regard 
 is to be had to the actual fact whether the people of the 
 village derive any advantage from the land or not, though 
 it should be near to the village; but Shums-ool-Aimmah 
 relies on what was approved by Aboo Yoosuf. (Kafee.) 
 
 The Imam has the power of cutting off waste; and if he The , 
 
 1 Literally, related to Add. " The tribe of Aad were a race 
 of ancient Arabs, who, according to the Kooran and Arab his- 
 torians, were destroyed by a suffocating wind, for their infidelity, 
 after their rejection of the admonition of the prophet Hood." Mr. 
 Lane's Notes to the Arabian Nights Entertainments, vol. i. p. 131. 
 The word Adee is not taken in its literal sense, as related to Add 
 but as merely meaning " what has been long spoiled or desolate.' 1 
 The expression is taken from the saying of the Prophet, " A dee 
 land belongs to God and his Prophet, and whoever revives dead \ 
 land, it is his," and is applied proverbially to anything long gone 
 
 by, which is said to be of the time of Add. Kifayah, vol. iv. p. 1093. 
 
 2 Land, the owner of which is unknown, is the property of the 
 general body of Mooslims. Ibid. 
 
 3 Arab, jfna, literally " round about," as explained in the Soorah. 
 
 G 
 
42 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 power to should do so in favour of a particular individual, and the 
 
 of S rt Se person should abandon and not cultivate it, no objection will 
 
 be taken for three years; but when three years have passed, 
 
 the land returns to the state of waste, and the Imam may 
 
 grant it to another. (Budayah.) 
 
 Property Property in waste is established by reclaiming it, 1 with the 
 estSishe^ P 61 88 * 011 f tne Imam according to Aboo Huneefa, and by 
 by reclaim- the mere act of reclaiming, according to Aboo Yoosuf, and 
 Moohummud; and a Zimtnee becomes the proprietor by 
 reclaiming, in the same way as a Mooslim would acquire the 
 property. (Budayah.) A person who reclaims waste land 
 without the permission of the Imam does not become its pro- 
 prietor according to Aboo Huneefa, but both his companions 
 have said that he does become its proprietor. 2 And Natifee 
 has mentioned, that the Kazee within his jurisdiction is in the 
 place of the Imam in this matter. (Futawa Kazee Khan.) 
 and is not If a person, after reclaiming, should abandon land, and 
 
 lost by another person should then sow it, it has been said that the 
 subsequent 
 
 abandon- second person would have the better right; but the sounder 
 opinion is in favour of the first, for he has become the pro- 
 prietor by reclaiming it, and will not be expelled from his 
 property by abandoning it. 3 
 
 1 Arab. Ihya; see ante, page 40, note 1, and definition a little 
 farther on. 
 
 2 Their opinion is founded on the saying of the prophet already 
 quoted, " whoever gives life to dead land it is his," and also on 
 the fact that waste is Mobah, or indifferent and free to all. It is 
 therefore the property of the first person who lays his hand upon 
 it, while Aboo Huneefa thinks that the saying alluded to had 
 reference to a particular occasion, and was not intended to esta- 
 blish the law, and that it is opposed to the more general saying 
 of the same person, " There is nothing to man unless what the 
 Imam has consented to." Moreover, waste land having come 
 within the power of Mooslims by aid of horse and spur, is plunder, 
 and, like other plunder, cannot be appropriated by any one without 
 the Imam's permission. Hidayah and Kifayah, vol. iv. p. 1093. 
 Hamilton's Hedaya, vol. iv. p. 129. When Aboo Yoosuf and 
 Moohummud concur in opinion against Aboo Huneefa, the Moo- 
 hummudan judge is at liberty to adopt whichever of the decisions 
 he may think more conformable to sound reason and authority. 
 See Moohum. Law of Sale , (Baillie^) Introduction, p. 55. 
 
 3 The principle of this difference is a difference of opinion as 
 
CULTIVATION OF WASTE LANDS. 43 
 
 A person does not acquire a right to waste land by putting Acts which 
 a stone upon it, 1 for that in truth is not reclaiming it, which amount to 
 
 implies the making it fit for sowing, while puting a stone reclaiming 
 , 5- 7.'. =!.. ,, wasteland. 
 
 upon it is only marking it by the stone; nor by cutting the 
 
 grass or thorns that may be upon it; nor by clearing it of 
 any things with which it may be covered, and placing them 
 around the land; nor by burning the thorns, &c. All this 
 does not amount to the establishment of property, but the 
 person who does them has a preferable claim, and the land 
 will not be taken from him for three years, and it would be 
 improper for any other to reclaim this land till three years 
 have expired; but this, rather as a matter of conscience than 
 of law, for if another person should actually reclaim the 
 land before the expiration of three years, he would become 
 the proprietor of it. (Tibyeen.) 
 
 A person has placed stones upon a piece of waste land in Acts which 
 the form of a minaret; by so doing he has in fact reclaimed co> 
 it, for that is tantamount to building upon it; and if he should 
 fence it or raise banks so as to retain its water, that would 
 be reclaiming it. (Mooheet-oos-Surukhsee.) 
 
 The definition of reclaiming is to build upon land, or plant Reclaim- 
 in it, or plough or water it. 2 (Khoolasa.) in defined 
 
 The lands of Ma-wura-oon-nuhr 3 and Khwarezm are not Ma-wura- 
 waste, for they were once divided, 4 and the disposal of them and KLwa- 
 
 to what is acquired by reclaiming land, some being of opinion 
 (among whom was Aboo Kasim, of Bulkh), that it is only a right 
 to the productive power of the land that is acquired, while the 
 general body of the learned maintain that is a right to the land 
 itself. Kifayah, vol. iv. p. 1094. 
 
 1 Arab, tuhjeer, from hujur, a stone. 
 
 2 It appears from the disjunctive or, that each act singly is 
 sufficient, but it is stated in the Hidayah, (vol. iv. p. 1096,) with 
 regard to ploughing and watering, that one of them singly without 
 the other would not be sufficient, according to Moohummud; but 
 the author of the Kifaydh, on the passage, cites the Mubsoot and 
 the Zukheerah as authority, that ploughing or making a mound 
 to retain water, &c., is reclaiming the land, vol. iv. p. 1096 ; what 
 is meant by watering land is explained a little further on. 
 
 3 What is beyond the river ; viz. Traiisoxiana. 
 
 4 The author seems to have written after the conquest of 
 Jenghiz Khan (about 1221, A.D.,) by which what had been the 
 
44 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 rizm, not belongs to the nearest proprietor or vendor of them, within 
 the time of Islam, or his heir; and if he cannot be ascertained, 
 the disposal of them rests with the judge. 1 ( Wujeez-ool- 
 Kurdery.} 
 
 Nor other Land which has been once appropriated, but the pro- 
 waf once* Pastors f which have become extinct, is like trove, 2 but it 
 appropri- has been said that it is as waste. (ZukheeraJi). And if a 
 person should erect a building upon it, or sow seed in it, or 
 make for it a dyke or embankment for confining its waters, 
 or the like, the place on which he has built or sown will be 
 his, but no more. Aboo Yoosuf has said, that if he cultivate 
 more than half, that is a reclaiming of so much, and of the 
 remainder also, regard being had to the larger portion. 3 
 (Moheet-oos-Surukhsee). And Moohummud has said that if 
 there be waste in the midst of what has been reclaimed, it is 
 a reclaiming of the whole, but that if the waste be on the side, 
 it is not a reclaiming of what remains. (Tatar KJianeeah.) 
 And Ibn Sumaut has related, as from Aboo Huneefa, that 
 if one should dig a well in it, or impel water to it, he has 
 already, in fact, reclaimed it, whether he sow it or not ; but 
 though he should dig channels in it, that would not be re- 
 claiming, unless he caused water to flow into them, which 
 also would be reclaiming, but if he were to burn the grass 
 upon it, that would not be reclaiming. (Moheet-oos-Surukh- 
 
 Dar-ool-Islam, or mansion of Islam, became aDar-ool-hurb,OT man- 
 sion of the enemy, and before the conversion of his descendant to 
 the Mooslim faith (1348, A.D.,) which restored the country to its 
 former condition. 
 
 1 Hakim, from hookm, command. The term is also applied to 
 a ruler. 
 
 2 A trove, after being duly advertised, may be kept by the 
 finder indefinitely, until the owner appears ; but this seems hardly 
 applicable to land, and land of which the owner is dead, without 
 heirs, belongs to the general body of Mooslims. Kifaijah^ vol. iv. 
 p. 1093. 
 
 3 This extract, though from a different author, evidently relates 
 to the same subject as the former, that is, land once appropriated; 
 but from the former part of the extract, it appears that, generally, 
 nothing more is acquired by reclaiming land, than the actual site 
 or spot reclaimed. 
 
CULTIVATION OF WASTE LANDS. 45 
 
 see.) If it were a marsh or forest, and one had cut its 
 
 reeds or trees, and had levelled the ground, that would be When land 
 
 reclaiming it. (Ghyaseeah.) l^by a~ 
 
 A man has appointed an agent to reclaim land for agent, the 
 
 him, and he has relaimed it; it belongs to the prin- fcthepro- 
 
 cipal, if the Imam gave his permission to reclaim it. P netor - 
 
 / TT 7 \ Land near 
 
 (Koonyali.) to land 
 
 It is not lawful, according; to us, to reclaim what is near already 
 
 .. . cultivated 
 
 to cultivated land. (Kunz.) cannot be 
 
 What the Tigris or Euphrates has abandoned by recession reclaimed - 
 
 of their waters, it is not lawful to reclaim, if the water may deserted & 
 
 return to it, because it is necessary to the public to have it bed of a 
 
 as a channel; but if the water cannot return to it, it is waste. 
 
 waste. (Siraj-ool-Wuliliaj^) Land has been submerged Case of 
 and become sea, but the water has again receded from it ; or 
 
 land has been spoiled in any other way, and a person comes and again 
 and cultivates it ; it has been said that the land belongs to f rom the 
 the ancient owner, but it has also been said that it belongs to sea - 
 the person who reclaims it. (Koonyah^) The Imam has 
 directed a person to cultivate dead land, on condition that he 
 will have advantage from it, but will not be its proprietor, 
 and he has reclaimed it ; he is not the proprietor, for this 
 condition is valid, according to Aboo Huneefa, because, in 
 his opinion, the property is not acquired without the Imam's 
 permission, and since the Imam did not give permission 
 to take the property, he does not become its proprietor. 
 (Moozmirat.) 
 
 A person reclaimed waste land, and another person then A road to 
 came, and reclaimed all the surrounding land, so as to [and"^ 
 inclose the land first reclaimed, on its four sides ; the first be made 
 was at liberty to make a road to his land, through the land surround- 
 which the other had reclaimed ; and if four persons should in & land 
 come, and each of them should reclaim a side of his land, so quently rc- 
 as to enclose his land with theirs, he would be at liberty to claimed - 
 make a road to his own land, through the land of any of the 
 others he might choose, since they reclaimed the land on his 
 sides together. (Zuheereeah.) 
 
 If a person should dig a well in waste land to such a Right to a 
 
46 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 well in depth as to leave but a cubit between him and the water, 
 a V c a quired nd and anotner should then dig, the first would have the pre- 
 by digging ferable right in it, unless it were known that he had actually 
 a cubit of abandoned it, and a month had intervened, since he left 
 water, o ff . k u t if ne nac [ dug on |y to t ] ie depth o f a cubit, that 
 
 would be no more than marking it, and not reclaiming it. 
 
 (Ghyaseeah.) 
 
 When the When there is a river, like the Tigris, with a place for 
 a a great wood or pasturage on its banks, it belongs to him who 
 river may reclaims it, unless it be within the confines of a village, and 
 claimed. the environs would be spoiled thereby ; in which case he 
 
 will be prevented, and the governor of a country may cut 
 When the off 1 a part from the line of the highway, when not injurious 
 highway. 6 to ^ ie Mooslims ; but some say that this power belongs 
 
 only to the Kliuleef, and those to whom he may specially 
 
 commit it. (Moheet.) 
 
 Incidents There are two effects or consequences that result from the 
 ot waste. 
 
 reclaiming of waste. One of these is hureem 2 and the 
 
 other Wuzeefa. 
 
 i. Hureem. With regard to the first there are two points for considera- 
 tion, one of which has relation to the right to hureem, and 
 the other to its extent. Now as regards the right, there is 
 no difference of opinion, that if a man should dig a well in 
 waste land, he has a hureem to it, and can prevent another 
 from digging within its hureem. In like manner, a spring 
 or fountain has its hureem, according to all opinions. As 
 
 Of a spring regards its extent, the hureem of a spring is 500 ziras by 
 common consent. 3 (Budayah.} It has been said, that it is 
 
 1 That is, in favour of an individual. 
 
 2 Literally, forbidden. 
 
 3 The authority for this is the saying of the Prophet, " The 
 hureem of a spring is 500 ziras.'" 1 Hidayah, vol. iv. p. 1096. It will 
 be seen presently that the hureem of a well is only forty or sixty 
 ziras at the most, and it is natural to inquire what is the reason 
 of so great a difference, and how is a spring or fountain distin- 
 guished from a well ? The spring or fountain is brought out to 
 water the ground, and one space is required through which 
 the water may be conducted from the fountain, another for a 
 reservoir wherein the water may be collected ; and a third for 
 
CULTIVATION OF WASTE LANDS. 47 
 
 500 ziras on the four sides taken together, that is 125 ziras 
 on each side ; but the more correct opinion is, that it is 500 
 ziras on each side ; and the zira intended is the mookussur, 
 or shortened zira, of six hands. l (Tibyeen.) The hureem of 
 a well which can be drawn by the hand is forty ziras, 2 of a well. 
 (BidayaK) ; and here also it has been said that it is forty ziras 
 on the four sides together, that is only ten on each side ; but 
 the correct opinion is, that it is forty ziras on each side. 
 (Tibyeen). The hureem of a well which requires camels to 
 draw it, 3 is sixty ziras , according to the two ; but Aboo 
 Huneefa has said " I know only forty ziras, 99 and the Futwa 
 is with him. 4 Sudur-oos-Shuheed has related, that if a per- 
 son should open a channel in waste land, he would not, in 
 the opinion of Aboo Huneefa, according to some, have any 
 right to a hureem, and that according to the other two he 
 would have a right, to it; but what is correct is, that he 
 would be entitled to a hureem, according to all their opinions. 
 And it is stated in the Nuwazir that the hureem of a water- Q f watcr 
 course is half its breadth on each side, according to Aboo course. 
 
 conveying the water from the reservoir to moisten the lands. 
 Hamilton's Hedaya, vol. iv. p. 135. A spring, therefore, rises 
 to the surface and flows off, while the water remains in the well 
 till it is drawn off. 
 
 1 The ordinary zira was a hand more. 
 
 2 The authority for this is the saying of the Prophet, " He who 
 digs a well has around it forty ziras as an utun for his beasts." 
 Hidayah, vol. iv. p. 1096. Utun means literally a reclining place 
 for camels, but an utun well is described in the Kifayah as one 
 that can be drawn by the hand, as if all the space required is 
 room for the camels to lie down. 
 
 3 Arab. Nazih, a camel that draws water, hence the well is 
 called a nazih well. The opinion of the two is founded on the 
 express saying of the Prophet, viz. " The hureem of a spring is 
 500 ziras, the hureem of an utun well is forty ziras, and the 
 hureem of a nazih well is sixty ziras" while Aboo Huneefa rests 
 on the saying already quoted, where there is no distinction as to 
 a nazih well, and a general saying which all agree in accepting 
 and acting upon, is preferable in his opinion to a special saying 
 which men differ in accepting and acting upon. Hidayah and 
 Kifayah, vol. iv. p. 1096. 
 
 4 No authority is cited, unless it be considered as part of the 
 following sentences. 
 
48 
 
 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 2. Wuzeefa. 
 
 No one can 
 lawfully 
 dig a well 
 in the 
 hureem of 
 another. 
 
 Qualifica- 
 tion of the 
 right to 
 hureem. 
 
 Hureem of 
 a tree. 
 
 Yoosuf, and the full breadth on each side according to 
 Mohummud ; but the Futwa is according to the saying of 
 Aboo Yoosuf. (Futawa Kazee Khan.) 
 
 The second effect or consequence of reclaiming waste 
 land is liability to Wuzeefa ; and if a Mooslim should reclaim 
 it, Aboo Yoosuf has said that the land would be Ooshree if 
 contiguous to Ooshree land, and Khirajee if contiguous to 
 Khirajee land; while Moohummud has said that if he reclaim 
 it by means of Ooshr water it is Ooshree, and if he reclaim 
 it by means of Khiraj water, it is Khirajee ; but if a Zimmee 
 should reclaim it, it would be Khirajee under all circum- 
 stances, according to all opinions. (Budayah.) 
 
 When a person has dug a well in a desert, with permis- 
 sion of the Imam, and another then comes and digs a well 
 within its hureem, the first may close up what the second has 
 dug; and in like manner, if another should build, or sow, 
 or innovate upon it in any way, the first may prevent him, 
 by reason of his right of property in the place. But if we 
 suppose that another, by order of the Imam, should dig a 
 well not within the hureem of the first, though near to it, 
 and that the water should go away from the well of the 
 first, and it is manifest that this has been occasioned by the 
 digging of the second well, the digger of the second would 
 not be in any way responsible to the owner of the first. 
 (Mubsoot.) 
 
 The right of hureem, extending on all sides into Waste 
 land, is subject to this qualification, that it is only in land 
 to which no one has any right ; for if one person should dig 
 a well, and another should then come and dig a well on the 
 verge of his hureem, the second would have no right to a 
 hureem on that side where lay the hureem of the first, though 
 he would be entitled to it on the other sides, where it would 
 not interfere with the right of another person. (Nihayah.) 
 
 When a man has planted a tree, with the permission of 
 the Imam, according to the three, or without it, according 
 to the two, has he a right to a hureem for it, so that if 
 another should come and plant a tree by the side of his tree, 
 could he prevent him ? Moohummud has not adverted to 
 
DIGGING OR CLEARING OF WATER COURSES. 49 
 
 this case in his book ; but our Elders have said that he has 
 a right to the extent of five ziras. (Moheet.) 
 
 A man erects a palace in the desert ; but he has no right No hureem 
 to a hureem, though it should be required for casting out t( 
 rubbish ; for he can derive the benefit of his palace without 
 having a hureem. (Tibyeen.) 
 
 SECTION. 
 
 Of the Digging or Clearing of Water Courses and 
 Repairing them. 
 
 courses are 
 
 Water-courses are of three kinds. Of some the digging Water 
 is on the Sooltan; of others, the digging is on the proprie- O f three' 
 tors of the water-course, and they may be compelled to dig kincls - 
 if they refuse ; of the third, the digging is also on the pro- 
 prietors, but they cannot be compelled, if they refuse. 
 
 The first are the great rivers, which have never entered i. The 
 into division, such as the Euphrates, the Tigris, Jyhoon, 
 Syhoon, and the Nile, which is a river of Room. 1 When 
 these require to be dug, or their banks to be repaired, it 
 will be done by the Sooltan out of the public treasury, and 
 if there be no funds in the public treasury, the Mooslims 
 will be compelled to dig, and turn out for this purpose. If 
 an individual Mooslim should wish to dig a channel from 
 these for the purpose of watering his lands, he may do so, 
 when it will not be injurious to the public ; but if it would 
 be injurious to the public, by breaking the bank, or there 
 should be any apprehension of inundation, he will be pre- 
 vented. 
 
 The second, or those water-courses the clearing and 2. General 
 repairing of which is the duty of their owners, and which, if nvers - 
 they refuse, they will be compelled by the Imam to perform, 
 
 1 These rivers are said to be public in every sense ; their waters 
 never have been divided, and never can be divided, because one 
 day they belong to one nation, and the next to others ; that is, I 
 suppose, their courses stretch through different countries. See 
 Kifayah, vol. iv. p. 1105. 
 
 H 
 
rivers. 
 
 50 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 are large rivers which have entered into division or dis- 
 tribution among villages. 1 The clearing and repairing of 
 these, when required, is upon their owners, and when they 
 refuse, they are to be compelled ; for a neglect of this duty 
 redounds to the injury of the whole, 2 and may diminish the 
 supply of water to those who are entitled to it, for drink to 
 themselves and cattle, 3 as well as lead to a scarcity of grain. 
 Since then the proprietors have the benefit of the water, and 
 the injury from a neglect of digging falls upon the whole, 
 they may be compelled to dig. 4 From these rivers no one 
 has a right to cut a channel to water his own land, whether 
 that would injure the owners of the stream or not. In this 
 water there is no right of shoofa. 5 
 
 3. Private The third, or those water-courses the clearing and repair- 
 ing of which is the duty of their owners, but which they 
 cannot be compelled to clear and repair, are private rivers. 
 With regard to these, some say that if a river belong to ten 
 or fewer persons, 6 or there be only one village upon it, to 
 which its waters are divided, it is a private river, which is 
 
 1 These are said to be public in one sense, and private in 
 another. Kifayah, vol. iv. p. 1105. The former, probably, from 
 the greater number of persons who are entitled to share in their 
 waters. 
 
 2 That is, the remaining partners. Hidayah, vol. iv. p. 1106. 
 
 3 Arab. Ahl-oos- Shooft, or people of shooft, shooft being the 
 right to water for drink to man and beast, common to all mankind. 
 It may be observed, that the diminution of this supply is not a 
 reason why the proprietors can be compelled to dig, for there is 
 no compulsion on this account. Ibid, page 1107. 
 
 4 That is, each individual may be compelled to dig, because 
 he is benefitted, and his neglect would injure, not himself only, but 
 the whole body of proprietors. 
 
 5 Pre-emption. In the original the word is shooft not shoofa, 
 but I think this must be a misprint, for it appears from what is 
 said above that there is a common right of shooft in the waters of 
 these rivers, and further, there is no other allusion to the right 
 of shoofa, though the absence of that right in these rivers, and its 
 existence in the next class, is that which mainly distinguishes 
 the one from the other. 
 
 6 I have added the word persons, believing that to be intended, 
 though in the original the words are only " ten or more," and so in 
 the other cases. It is important, that however great the number 
 of persons, if there be only one village upon the river, it is private. 
 
DIGGING OK CLEARING OF WATER COURSES. 51 
 
 subject to the right of Shoofa. 1 Some say again, that if it 
 belong to fewer than forty persons it is a private river, and 
 that if it belong to forty it is general; while others say that 
 if the number be under a hundred it is private; and others 
 that if it be under a thousand it is private; but what has 
 been said, that it ought to be committed to a Moojtuhid or 
 scientific jurist to choose among these sayings, is the most 
 correct. With regard then to private rivers, if some of the 
 partners should wish to clear them and others refuse, Aboo 
 Bukr Ben Saeed of Balkh has said, that the Imam will not 
 compel them, and that if those who wish that they should be 
 cleared, should proceed to clear them, they would be volun- 
 taries in the matter; but Aboo Bukr-al-Askaf has said that 
 they will be compelled, and Khusaf has stated, in treating of 
 maintenance, that the Kazee will direct those who desire 
 the clearance of the channel, to clear it, and when they have 
 done this, they may prohibit the others from deriving any 
 advantage from it, until they contribute their shares of the 
 expense of clearing; and to this effect there is a report from 
 Aboo Yoosuf. If the whole of them wish to abandon the 
 digging, the Imam will not compel them, according to the 
 Zahir Rewayut; but some of the moderns have said that the 
 Imam will compel them. (Futawa Kazee 
 
 1 See before, note 5. " The difference between them (that is 
 the two last classes) is the right to shoofa, and the absence of that 
 right, that is, wherever there is the right, the river is private, 
 wherever it is not, it is general. Kifayah, vol. iv. p. 1106. 
 
 2 The authority seems to apply to the whole of this section. 
 
52 
 
 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 OF MOOZARAUT. 1 
 
 Legal cha- 
 racter. 
 
 Definition. 
 
 How con- 
 stituted. 
 
 Condi- 
 tions. 
 
 Confirma- 
 tory. 
 
 [This Chapter is composed of extracts from the Book of Moozaraut. 
 Futawa Alumgeeree, vol. v. p. 359.] 
 
 It is invalid, according to Aboo Huneefa, but permitted 
 according to the other two; and the Futwa is in accordance 
 with their opinion, from a regard to the necessities of man- 
 kind. In law it is defined to be a contract of sowing for 
 some part of the produce ; and it is a hiring, either of the 
 land, or of the labourer, 2 for a part of the produce. (Moheet- 
 oos-Surukhsee.) It is constituted by declaration and accept- 
 ance ; that is, if the owner of the land 3 say to the labourer, 
 " I have delivered to thee this land in Moozdratit for so 
 much," and the labourer say, " I have accepted," or " am 
 satisfied," or what indicates his acceptance or satisfaction; 
 when this has taken place, the contract between them is per- 
 fected. 
 
 The conditions of the contract, according to those who 
 approve of it, are of two kinds, confirmatory and invalidating. 
 The confirmatory conditions are also of several kinds ; some 
 having reference to the parties, 4 some to the instrument of 
 
 1 Infinitive of the fifth increased conjugation, from zurau, 
 sowing. It means, literally, " mutual sowing," or " mutual 
 cultivation," which would require the action of both parties to 
 the. contract, whereas, in law, the action is entirely on one side. 
 Kifayah, vol. iv. p. 996. 
 
 2 Arab. Amil. from uml, work. 
 
 8 Arab. Sahib-ool-urz. See ante, p. 11, note 2. 
 
 4 Arab. Moozdrea, participle of the fifth increased conjugation, 
 strictly applicable to both parties to the contract, and so evidently 
 applied here, and a little further on, but usually restricted to the 
 labourer or husbandman. It is worthy of remark, that it is used 
 
MOOZABAUT. 53 
 
 Moozdraut, some to the tiling sown, some to the issue from 
 the sowing, some to the place in which it is sown, and some 
 to the time of the contract. 
 
 There are two conditions that relate to the parties. The That re- 
 first is, that they be persons of understanding; and the ' 
 
 Moozdraut of an insane person, or of a youth who does not 
 understand Moozdraut, is invalid. The second is that they 
 should not be apostates, according to those who follow the 
 analogy of Aboo Huneefa's opinion, yet approve of Moozd- 
 raut ; l but according to the other two, this is not a condition 
 necessary to the legality of Moozdraut, and the Moozdraut of 
 an apostate is immediately operative. 
 
 With regard to the thing sown, or the species of seed, it the thing 
 is requisite that it should be known ; by which is meant, 
 that it should be explained, unless the labourer be told to 
 sow what he pleases, when he would be at liberty to sow 
 anything, but not to plant, for it is only sowing, not planting, 
 that falls within the scope of the contract. (Bidayah.) It 
 is not a condition that the quantity of the seed should be 
 explained, for that may be known by indicating the land ; 
 and though the parties should not have explained the kind of 
 seed, yet if the seed were to be supplied by the owner of the 
 land, the contract would be lawful, because with regard to 
 him the Moozdraut is not binding before the casting of the 
 seed, and at the casting of the seed, the point is ascertained, 
 and information, when a contract becomes binding, is equiva- 
 
 in this sense, in India. In the address at the head of zemindary 
 Sunuds, it occurs in conjunction with Raaya, (the plural of Ryot,) 
 thus Raaya o Moozara-an, "subjects and cultivators." (Disserta- 
 tion on the Landed Property of Bengal, by C. W. B. Rouse, p. 74.) 
 The first word literally means " herds of cattle," or " beasts of 
 burden," but is applied to subjects generally, or the people at 
 large, more particularly the poorer classes; the latter being a 
 technical term, seems to indicate that the persons to whom it is 
 applied, were, at one time, Moozdrea in the strict sense of the 
 word, that is, that they held their lands under this particular 
 contract. 
 
 1 That is, those who .agree with Aboo Huneefa as to the 
 in competency of an apostate, yet differ from him in thinking 
 Moozdraut lawful. 
 
54 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 lent to information at the time of contracting. (Futawa 
 Kazee Khan.) 
 
 the pro- The conditions that relate to the issue or produce from 
 the sowing, are of several kinds, and among these, it is re- 
 quired that the produce be mentioned at the contract, for 
 silence in regard to it would vitiate the contract; that it 
 shall belong to both the parties, for if the whole be stipulated 
 to one of them, the contract is invalid ; that the share of 
 each of the parties 1 shall be a portion of the produce, for if 
 agreed for in anything else, that would vitiate the contract, 
 as being inconsistent with the idea of partnership, which is 
 essential to this contract ; that this portion of the produce 
 shall be known in quantity, as a half, a third, a fourth, or the 
 like, and shall be a distributive or indiscriminate share of 
 the whole, for if a known number of kufeezes were stipulated 
 for in favour of one of the parties, that would invalidate the 
 contract, and in like manner, if one of the parties should 
 stipulate for a return of the seed, and that the remainder of 
 the produce, after deducting it, should be divided between 
 them, the Moozdraut would not be valid, as the land might 
 yield no more than a return for the seed. 
 
 the land. The conditions that relate to the place of sowing, or in 
 other words, the land, are, that it shall be in a state fit for 
 sowing, for if excessively moist the contract is unlawful; 
 that it be known, for if unknown, the Moozdraut is not valid, 
 as that would lead to contention; that the land should be 
 delivered up to the contractor 2 vacated, that is, that there 
 should be on the part of the owner of the land, a vacating 
 of the land to the labourer ; for if it were stipulated that 
 that the landlord 3 should work, the Moozdraut would not 
 be valid for want of vacating; and in like manner, if it 
 were stipulated that both should work together. (Bidayah.) 
 Vacating is when the owner of the land says to the labourer, 
 " I have delivered up to thee the land," and it implies that 
 
 1 Literally, the two Moozarea. 
 
 2 Arab. Akid, which is here substituted for amil. 
 
 3 Arab. Rubb-ool-urz, literally, lord or master of the land. The 
 same person is evidently intended as he who has just been called 
 Sahib-ool-urz, or owner of the land. 
 
MOOZARAUT. 55 
 
 the land is actually vacant or free of anything at the time of 
 the contract ; for if it contain seed that has already sprung 
 up, the contract, though lawful, would be a Moodmulut, 1 not a 
 Moozdraut, and if the seed have become plant that has already 
 ripened, there would no longer be any occasion for work, 
 which would preclude the idea of Moodmulut, and the con- 
 tract would be entirely unlawful. (Futawa Kazee Khan.) 
 
 So far as relates to the instrument of Moozdraut, it is the cattle, 
 required that the cattle shall be an accessory, for if made 
 a primary object in the contract, that would vitiate the 
 moozdraut. 
 
 With regard to the time 2 it is necessary that it should be the time, 
 known, and Moozdraut is not valid without an explanation of 
 the time, on account of the difference in the times of com- 
 mencing the operations of husbandry; but if the transaction 
 take place in a village 3 where there is no such difference, it is 
 lawful, without any specification of the time. (Bidayah^) If a 
 time be mentioned which is insufficient for the cultivation, the 
 Moozdraut is vitiated, such mention being equal to no mention 
 at all; and in like manner, when a time is mentioned that 
 there is no probability of one of the parties living so long. 4 
 (Zukheerah.) 
 
 It is further requisite that it should be specified by which Further 
 of the parties the seed is to be supplied; for if it be supplied 
 by the owner of the land the Moozdraut is a hiring of the seed, 
 labourer, and if it is supplied by the labourer the Moozdraut 
 is a hiring of the land; the subject of the contract therefore, 
 
 1 Mutual working, from uml, work. 
 
 2 Arab, mooddut, from mudd, extension a space of time. From 
 the examples, it is evident that the beginning and the end of the 
 time should be known. 
 
 3 Arab. Mowzah. This is the common name for a village in 
 India. 
 
 4 The time should be limited, as " for one or two years, or^the 
 like." But Moohummud Ben Sulma has said that Moozdraut 
 without any limit of time is lawful, and that in that case, it will 
 be presumed to be for one year, or for one sowing. Kifayah, vol. 
 iv. p. 995. A case is mentioned in the Khuzanut-ool-Mooftien, 
 of a Moozdraut for three years. Fut. Alum. vol. v. p. 379. 
 
56 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 is unknown. Its effects also are different; for the contract 
 with regard to him by whom the seed is not to be supplied 
 is immediately binding, but with regard to the owner of the 
 seed, it is not binding till the seed is cast into the ground. 
 The lawyer Aboo Bukr, of Bulkh, has said, that custom is 
 the rule in this case; if the transaction take place in a village 
 where the seed is usually supplied by the labourer or by the 
 owner of the land, regard is to be had to the custom of the 
 people, and the party who would be liable to furnish the 
 seed according to the custom, should be made to supply it, if 
 the practice be uniform, but if in both ways, the MoozdraUt 
 would be invalid. This is when no words are used to 
 indicate the party by whom the seed is to be supplied; but 
 if the owner of the land should say, " I have delivered to 
 thee this land that thou mayest sow it for me," or " I have 
 hired thee to work in it for half the produce;" this would 
 amount to an indication that the seed was to be supplied by 
 the owner of the land; while if he should say, " that thou 
 mayest sow it for thyself," it would indicate that the seed 
 was to be supplied by the labourer. (Futawa Kazee KJian). 
 And Ibn Roostum has reported, as from Moohummud, in 
 his Nuwadir, that if one person should say to another, " I 
 have let thee this my land for a year, at a half," or " a third," 
 it would be lawful, and the cultivator be bound to furnish 
 the seed; but suppose him to say, " I have delivered to thee 
 my land in Moozdratit? or "have given thee my land in 
 Moozdraut for a third," that would not be lawful, since there 
 is nothing to show by whom the seed is to be supplied, which 
 is a necessary condition ; while, if he were to say, " I have 
 hired thee to sow this my land for a third," that would be 
 lawful, and the supply of the seed obligatory on the landlord. 
 {Zuklieerali). 
 
 Invalida- The conditions which invalidate Moozdratit are of different 
 ting eon- kinds, and among them are the following : viz. a condition 
 that the whole produce shall belong to one of the parties, 
 for that cuts off the idea of a partnership ; a condition for 
 work on the part of the owner of the land, for that prevents 
 delivery; a condition that he shall furnish the cattle; a 
 
MOOZARAUT. 57 
 
 condition "that he shall reap the grain, and deliver it at the 
 threshing floor, and tread it out, and sift it. The principle 
 is, that every thing required for the good of the plant pre- 
 vious to its ripening and drying, such as watering, guarding, 
 pulling up grass, digging water courses, and the like, is to 
 be performed by the cultivator, and every work that may 
 be required between the ripening and drying of the crop, 
 and the partition of the grain, for the purposes of separating 
 it from the husk, and winnowing it, is to be performed by 
 both the parties, in proportion to their interests in the pro- 
 duce, and every work which may be required after partition, 
 for the purpose of carrying the grain to the house, and 
 securing it, is to be done by each party in relation to his own 
 portion, And it is reported of Aboo Yoosuf that he sanc- 
 tioned a condition imposing on the cultivator the duty of 
 reaping, and delivering the grain at the threshing floor, and 
 treading it out and sifting it, from a regard to the practice 
 of mankind ; and some of our Doctors in Mawura-oon-nuhr 
 have decided accordingly. Nusr Ben Yahya and Moo- 
 hummud Ben Soolma, among those of Khoorassan, also 
 approving of the decision. (Bidayah.) But such a condition, 
 imposing these duties on the labourer, would be unlawful, 
 according to the Zahir Rewayut. (Futawa Kazee Khan and 
 Koobra.} While Nusr Ben Yahya and Moohummud Ben 
 Soolma have said that all this must be done by the labourer, 
 whether conditioned for or not, from a regard to custom, 
 and according to Surukhsee this is correct in our country, 
 and Aboo Bukr Ben Moohummud, when asked his opinion 
 upon the point, used to answer, that the practice was quite 
 clear. (Futawa Kazee KJian.) 
 
 Among vitiating conditions is also to be mentioned a con- Eurther 
 dition for the straw to one who does not supply the seed, that would 
 and a condition by the owner of the land as against the vitiate the 
 cultivator, for some work the effect and advantage of which 
 will continue after the expiration of the time. As to 
 ploughing, if stipulated for absolutely without any mention 
 of. its being to be done twice, a stipulation for it would not 
 vitiate the Moozdraut, according to general agreement ; and 
 this is correct ; but if the parties should agree that it is to be 
 
 I 
 
58 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 done twice, that would vitiate the MoozdraUt ; for by twice 
 must be meant, either that one of the ploughings is to be 
 before the sowing, and the other after the reaping, in order 
 that the land may be returned ploughed to the owner, 
 which would, without doubt, vitiate the contract, for plough- 
 ing after the harvest is not an operation of the same year ; or 
 that the land is to be ploughed twice before it is sown, 
 which would be a work that must leave its effect and advan- 
 tage after the expiration of the term ; and such a condition 
 would vitiate the contract, except in a mouzah or village, 
 where there would be no such continuance of the advantage. 
 Effects of Among the effects or consequences of Moozdratit, are the 
 following. Every act necessary for the good of the plant 
 must be done by the cultivator, and everything necessary for 
 its nourishment, such as dung, the extraction of grass, 1 and 
 the like, must be contributed by both the parties, in propor- 
 tion to their respective rights. And so also with regard to 
 the reaping, and carrying the produce to the threshing floor, 
 and treading it out. It is a further consequence that the 
 parties are entitled to the produce in the proportions specified, 
 and that when the earth makes no return, neither of them 
 is entitled to anything, either as wages of labour or rent of 
 land, whether the seed have been supplied by the labourer 
 or the owner of the land; (Bidayah;) and further, that when 
 any calamity overtakes the plant before ripening, neither 
 party has any claim against his fellow. (Zukheerah.) It is 
 a further effect of this contract, that it is not binding on the 
 party who has to furnish the seed, but binding on his fellow, 
 so that if the former, after entering into the contract, should 
 refuse to proceed, saying " I do not wish to sow," he is at 
 liberty to decline, with or without reason, but his fellow can- 
 not decline, without a sufficient reason. (Bidayah.) After 
 the seed has been cast into the ground, the contract becomes 
 binding upon both parties ; so that after this, one of the parties 
 cannot cancel without an adequate reason. (Molieet.} It is 
 stated in the Moontuka, as from Aboo Yoosuf, that when the 
 
 1 This seems inconsistent with what was said on page 57, but 
 the words are the same in the original. 
 
MOOZARAUT. 59 
 
 seed is to be furnished by the landlord, and he has delivered 
 it to the cultivator, neither of them has the power to cancel 
 the Moozdraut, but if he has not delivered the seed to the 
 cultivator, the landlord may cancel the contract, but the 
 cultivator has not the power to do so. (Zukheerah.) Another 
 effect of the contract is the power of compelling the culti- 
 vator to plough. When there is an express stipulation to 
 that effect, he may of course be compelled to plough, and 
 even when there is no such stipulation, yet if the land be 
 such as does not usually yield its produce without ploughing, 
 or only to a small extent, he may be compelled to plough. 
 If, however, the land should be such as usually yields its 
 produce in an adequate degree without ploughing, then he 
 cannot be compelled to plough, in the absence of an express 
 stipulation. And in like manner, if the cultivator should 
 refuse to water, he cannot be compelled when the land is 
 such as usually yields its produce with water from the 
 heavens ; but if it be such that the rain from the heavens 
 is not sufficient to enable it to make a suitable return, then 
 he may be compelled to water it. (Bidayah.) 
 
 *With regard to the different kinds of MoozdraUt, the Different 
 principle in these matters is that the hiring of land for a 
 portion of the produce is lawful, and that the hiring of the 
 labourer for a portion of the produce is also lawful, but that 
 the hiring of any other than these for a portion of the pro- 
 duce is not lawful. (Moheet^) Moozdratit is of two kinds, 
 one where the land belongs to one of the parties, and the 
 other where it belongs to both. The former case, where the 
 land belongs to one of the parties, is further divided Into 
 two kinds ; one where the seed belongs to only one of the 
 parties, and the other where it belongs to both. When the 
 land belongs to only one of the parties, and the seed also to 
 only one, the contract admits of six different species, three gj x species 
 of which are lawful and three invalid. Of the three first, of the con " 
 one species is where the land is supplied by one party, and 
 the seed, the cattle, and labour by the other, and some known lawful. 
 
 * N.B. The extracts from hence to the N.B. on page 61, are 
 taken from the second chapter, p. 364-367. 
 
60 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 share of the produce is stipulated for to the owner of the 
 land. This is lawful; for the owner of the seed becomes 
 the hirer of the land for a portion of the produce. The 
 second species is, where the labour is supplied by one and 
 the remainder by the other ; and this too is lawful, because 
 the owner of the seed is the hirer of the labourer for some- 
 thing known out of the produce, that he may work the land 
 with his cattle and his seed. The third species is when the 
 land and seed are furnished by one party, and the labour 
 and cattle by the other ; and this likewise is lawful, for the 
 owner of the land becomes the hirer of the labourer, that 
 the labourer may work with his cattle for the owner of the 
 land and seed. 
 
 Three Qf the invalid species of Moozdraut the first is where the 
 
 invalid. 
 
 land and cattle are supplied by one of the parties, and the 
 
 remainder by the other; and this is invalid, for though, 
 according to Aboo Yoosuf it is allowed, from a regard to 
 custom, yet the Futwa is with the Zahir Rewayut, because 
 the advantage derived from the land and from the cattle, 
 are not of the same kind, that of the land being the growth 
 of the seed from a power inherent in it, and that from the 
 cattle being labour, and since the advantage derived from the 
 cattle is not of the same kind as that derived from the land, 
 the cattle cannot be an accessory to the land, but stand 
 as a separate object in the contract, which would thus be a 
 hiring of the cattle, and be defective in the same way as if 
 the cattle alone belonged to one of the parties. The second 
 of the invalid species is where the seed belongs to one of the 
 parties, and all the rest to the other; and this is invalid, because 
 the owner of the seed becomes the hirer of the land, which 
 should be vacated or delivered to him, but it is in the hands 
 of the labourer, not of the owner of the seed. And the 
 third of the species is, where the seed and the cattle belong 
 to one of the parties, and the land and the labour to the 
 other, and this also is invalid. 1 (Futawa Kazee Khan.) 
 
 1 It is unnecessary to pursue the subject farther into cases 
 where the seed belongs to both, but the land to only one of the 
 parties, or where the land belongs to both, and the seed also to 
 
MOOZARAUT. 61 
 
 When a Moozdraut is invalid, the cultivator is not bound Effects of 
 to perform any of the acts which are required of him under jj*2 
 a lawful contract; the whole crop belongs to the owner of raju - 
 the seed, whether he be the owner of the land or the cul- 
 tivator; and when the seed belongs to the owner of the land 
 the cultivator is entitled to the wages of his labour, and when 
 it belongs to the labourer, the landlord is entitled to the hire 
 or rent of his land. 1 (Bidayah.) 
 
 * A person delivers land and seed to another, that he may M iscella - 
 
 ' J neous cases 
 
 sow it by himself, and with his cattle and hired servants, and 
 
 the parties agree that the whole produce shall belong to the 
 owner of the land ; this transaction is lawful, as stated by 
 Moohummud, in the Asul; not however, that it is a lawful 
 Moozdraut) for such a transaction is not a Moozdraut at 
 all, since in a Moozdraut it is necessary that the produce 
 shall be in partnership between both the parties, and here 
 there is no partnership. It is merely meant, that if the 
 whole produce be stipulated for to the owner of the seed, it 
 is lawful. And if it were agreed that the whole produce 
 should belong to the cultivator, that also would be lawful; 
 meaning thereby that a stipulation for the whole of the pro- 
 duce to the cultivator is lawful. (Zukheerah.) When a 
 person delivers seed to another, saying, " sow it in thy land, 
 that the whole produce may be thine," or " sow thy land 
 with my seed that the whole produce may be thine ;" this is 
 lawful, and the owner of the seed becomes a lender of it to 
 the owner of the land, that he may sow it in his land, the 
 landlord having already possession of it in his hands. But 
 if the owner of the seed had said to him, " sow for me thy 
 land with my seed, and the whole produce shall be thine," 
 this would be invalid, and the whole produce would belong 
 
 both of the parties. In some of these cases the contract is lawful, 
 and in others invalid, according to the special stipulations \vith 
 which it may be accompanied; but they do not seem to have 
 been much in use, and are not mentioned in the Hidayah. 
 
 L There are other effects which it is unnecessary to specify. 
 
 * N.B. The authorities from this to the N.B. on page 64, are 
 from chapter iii. p. 367-372. 
 
62 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 to the owner of the seed. And when seed is delivered to a 
 man that he may sow it in his land, on condition that the 
 whole produce shall belong to the owner of the seed, such a 
 condition is lawful, and the owner of the seed becomes a 
 borrower of the land from the landlord, availing himself of 
 his assistance to sow it with his seed; all which is lawful. 
 But suppose that he had said, " sow this in thy land for 
 thyself, on condition that what return God may bestow shall 
 be wholly mine ;" the whole produce would belong to the 
 owner of the land, and the owner of the seed would be 
 entitled to the return of a similar, in kind and quantity, 
 of his seed. (Zukheerah.) And when a man delivers his 
 land to another that he may sow it, on condition that what 
 God may bestow, shall belong to both in halves, but the 
 parties are silent with regard to the obligation to supply 
 the cattle being on the labourer, or it may be that it is 
 made an express condition; the labourer would in both 
 cases be obliged to supply the cattle, whether the seed were 
 on his part or on that of the owner of the land, because the 
 cattle are the instrument of labour, and must be supplied 
 by him who is obliged to provide the labour. (.Khuzanut- 
 oo l-Mooftieen. ) 
 
 Stipula- When the land is Khirajee, and the parties make it a con- 
 
 pmrmeni dition that the Khiraj shall be set apart, and the remainder 
 of the be divided among them in halves, this is invalid, if the land 
 be Moowuzzuf, as it may possibly yield no more than the 
 amount of the Khiraj; but if the Khiraj be Mookasimah, as 
 a third or a fourth, the condition would be lawful. (Kafee.) 
 And if there be a stipulation in favour of the owner of the 
 seed for a tenth of the produce, after which the remainder is 
 to be divided between them, the Moozdraut is lawful ; for 
 such a stipulation is not inconsistent with the idea of a part- 
 nership in the produce, since, however small the produce 
 may be, there will still be a tenth of it; and this affords a 
 device to the owner of the seed by which he may secure to 
 himself a return of his seed; for he may stipulate in his own 
 favour for a quantity equal to the seed, under the name of 
 a tenth, a third, or the like, and that the remainder, after 
 
MOOZABAUT. 63 
 
 deducting it, shall be divided between the parties. (Nihayah.) 
 
 If it be stipulated that a tenth shall be to one who does not 
 
 furnish the seed, and that the remainder shall belong to both 
 
 the parties, the condition is lawful; and supposing the land 
 
 to be Ooshree, and that the parties should stipulate for setting or Ooshr. 
 
 apart a tenth, if it should be watered by flowing water, or half 
 
 a tenth if it should be watered by the wheel, and a division 
 
 of the remainder between them, in halves, that also would be 
 
 lawful; and when the produce is obtained and the Sooltan has 
 
 taken his right, either a tenth or half a tenth, as the case may 
 
 be, the remainder will belong to the parties, in halves. And 
 
 if the Sooltan should not take anything from them, or they 
 
 should clandestinely abstract a part of their grain from the 
 
 Sooltan, the tenth out of this, which was conditioned in favour 
 
 of the Sooltan, would belong to the owner of the land, accord- 
 
 ing to those who follow the general analogy of Aboo 
 
 Huneefa's opinion, yet approve of Moozdraiit; but according 
 
 to Aboo Yoosuf and Moohummud, it would belong to both 
 
 the parties, in halves. But suppose that his companion should Alterna- 
 
 say to the labourer, " I dont know what the Sooltan may 
 
 take from us, whether a tenth, or half a tenth, but I employ relating: to 
 ,,.,, . i i p the Ooshr. 
 
 you on condition that halt what the land may yield, after 
 
 deducting what is taken by the Sooltan, shall be mine, and 
 half yours ;" that would be invalid, according to the analogy 
 of Aboo Huneefti's opinion, but lawful, according to Aboo 
 Yoosuf and Moohummud, and the division would be between 
 them as agreed upon. The case supposes that the land is 
 such that the water of the heavens would suffice for it when 
 the rains are abundant, but that it requires to be watered by 
 means of the wheel when the rains are deficient, and in 
 taking a tenth or half a tenth from such land, the Sooltan 
 has regard to the greater part of the year. 1 The case is, 
 therefore the same, as if the parties should say, " we dont 
 know how the rain may be this year, and consequently what 
 the Sooltan may take out of the produce," and should enter 
 into their agreement accordingly. Then, according to Aboo 
 Huneefa, as the landlord is liable for a tenth or half a tenth, 
 
 1 See ante, papre 26. 
 
64 
 
 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 Alterna- 
 tive con- 
 ditions 
 in relation 
 to Khiraj. 
 
 Sub Moo- 
 zaraut 
 unlawful, 
 without 
 
 such a stipulation is equivalent to a condition for an unknown 
 portion, viz. a tenth or half a tenth, in favour of the landlord, 
 which would vitiate the contract; but according to Aboo 
 Yoosuf and Moohummud, the tenth or half tenth is in the 
 produce, and as the produce is between them both in halves, 
 the stipulation is merely a condition that the whole produce 
 shall belong to the parties in halves, which does not vitiate 
 the contract. (Mubsoot.) And if the land be Khirajee, and 
 the owner of the land should say to the labourer, " we dont 
 know whether the Sooltan will this year take from us 
 Khiraj Wuzeefa, or Khiraj Mookasimah, by which is meant 
 that the land is really Wuzeefa, but that in some years it is 
 unable to pay Wuzeefa Khiraj, when it would not be lawful 
 for the Sooltan to take the Khiraj Wuzeefa, but he must 
 take it Mookasimah, 1 that is, as far as a half of the produce, 
 and that the proprietor 2 in fact says, "we do not know 
 whether the land will this year be able to bear the Wuzeefa, 
 in which case the Sooltan would take that, or whether it will 
 not be able to bear it, when he will only take Mookasimah" 
 and further says to the Moozdrea, " I will employ you on 
 condition that whatever the Sooltan may take, be it Mooka- 
 simah or Wuzeefa, shall be deducted, and the remainder be 
 divided between us," such a Moozdraut would be invalid. 
 And suppose that a person should give up his land to two 
 others to sow it with their seed, on condition that one should 
 have a third of the produce and the other nine Kufeezes out 
 of the produce, the Moozdraut would be vitiated in toto, 
 according to him; while with the other two, it would be 
 lawful as to the person to get the third, but invalid with 
 respect to the person for whom nine Kufeezes was stipu- 
 lated. (Kafee.) 
 
 8 When a cultivator wishes to give up the land to another, 
 
 1 See ante, page 6, note 3. 
 
 2 Arab. Malik. The word signifies proprietor in the most 
 absolute sense, and being here applied to the Sahib-ool- Urz, shews 
 that by that expression is to be understood not the mere possessor, 
 but the actual owner of the land. 
 
 3 The authorities to the N.B. on page 68, are from chapter v. 
 p. 382-385. 
 
MOOZABAUT. 65 
 
 in Moozdraut, if the seed were supplied by the landlord, landlord's 
 he cannot lawfully give up the land without the landlord's ^h 1 ^ " 
 permission, either express or implied, as, for instance, by supplies 
 the landlord's saying, " do with it as you please." He may, 
 however, hire labourers with his own property, to perform 
 the work, unless it were expressly stipulated that he should 
 do the work himself. And if he should give up the land to 
 another, at a half, though the landlord had not given his 
 permission, either expressly or by implication, it has been 
 said that the Moozdraut would be lawful, as between the 
 first and second cultivator, and that the landlord would 
 have nothing, but that the owner of the land and seed might 
 make either of the parties responsible for his seed; and 
 if he should cast the responsibility on the first, the first 
 could have no recourse against the second ; while, if the 
 second were made responsible, he might have recourse 
 to the first; but if the land were damaged, the second, 
 and not the first, would be responsible, according to Aboo 
 Huneefa, and the last opinion of Aboo Yoosuf. (Zukheerah~) 
 
 If the owner of the land and seed should give his per- Lawful, 
 mission to the cultivator, expressly or by implication, as, 
 for instance, if he should say, " do with it as you please," 
 and if the owner of land and seed had already stipulated 
 with the cultivator for a half, and the first should give up 
 the land to the second, the second Moozdraut would be 
 lawful, but whatever the earth might produce, would be- 
 long, one half to the landlord, and one half to the second 
 cultivator, while the first would fall between them ; but if 
 the first should stipulate with the second for a half to the 
 owner of the property, 1 and the remaining half either in one 
 
 1 Arab. Mai, which includes both land and seed. As this 
 word is commonly applied in India to the land revenue, or the 
 Khiraj itself, but has been confounded by some writers with the 
 right to the Khiraj, I avail myself of its occurrence in this place 
 to explain what I believe to be its strict meaning in the Moohum- 
 mudan Law, though I may, perhaps, be led beyond the ordinary 
 limits of a foot note. Mai, or property, is denned to be " that 
 which can be taken possession of and secured." (Hidayah and 
 Kifayah, vol. iii- p. 103.) It is, therefore, essentially tangible or 
 corporeal; and a mere right cannot, in any sense, be said to be 
 
66 
 
 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 But when 
 the culti- 
 vator sup- 
 plies the 
 seed, it is 
 lawful 
 without 
 such per- 
 mission. 
 
 and two thirds, or in halves, between the cultivators, that 
 also would be lawful, and the produce be divided, according 
 as they had agreed. (Moheet.) 
 
 When a person gives up his land to another to sow it for 
 this year with his own seed, on condition that the crop shall 
 belong to both, in halves, (whether he say or do not say " do 
 with it as you please,") and the cultivator delivers the land 
 with seed to another person in Moozdratit at a half, this is 
 
 mal. Indeed, it is expressly stated in the same authority, that 
 a right is not mal. Mal may be considered, either as specific or 
 as indeterminate. In the former case it is called, in the Moohum- 
 mudan Law, ayn, or a thing, and in the latter deyn, or obligation, 
 "as it is only through the obligation of some one that things taken 
 indeterminately can be made the subject of legal cognizance. It 
 is not easy to distinguish the right to ayn, or a specific thing, from 
 the thing itself, but the right to deyn, or an obligation, is easily 
 distinguishable from the obligation itself. The former right is 
 called jus in re, by the civilians, and the latter jus ad rem. Ayn 
 and Deyn are both fit objects of transfer, either by sale or gift, 
 according to the Moohummudan Law. So also is the right to 
 ayn, or the jus in re ; but the right to deyn, or jus ad rem, or, in 
 other words, the power of a creditor to exact the payment or 
 performance of an obligation, is not a proper object of transfer, 
 nor can the benefit to be derived from it be conferred on any 
 other than the debtor himself; as, for instance, by releasing or 
 cancelling the debt. (Hidayali and Kifayah, vol. iii. p. 615.) 
 
 The Mookasimah Khiroj is described as a share of an actually 
 existing crop, and is therefore specific or ayn ; and the Wuzeefa is 
 described as an obligation, and is therefore indeterminate, or 
 deyn. In both cases it is obviously the things themselves, and 
 not the rights to them, that are intended; and in this sense both 
 the Mookasimah and Wuzeefa Khiraj are properly described as 
 mal, and are fit subjects of transfer. The right to the Mookasi- 
 mah (which being a specific right is scarcely distinguishable from 
 the thing itself) is also transferable ; but the right to the Wuzeefa, 
 being a right to an obligation, cannot be legally nor even effectu- 
 ally transferred, in any way, known to the Moohummudan Law. 
 What has been said has reference only to the Kliiraj of the year ; 
 for as to the right to the Khiraj of future years, which has not 
 yet accrued, it is in both cases a mere naked right, that cannot, 
 in any sense, be said to be the subject of transfer. I am, there- 
 fore, inclined to think that what some writers have supposed to 
 be transfers of the right to the Khiraj, were, in reality, what they 
 generally appear to be, either transfers of land, or only orders for 
 payment of the Kliiraj, as it might accrue, in favour of particular 
 individuals. On the subject of things and obligations, see Moo- 
 hummudan Law of Sale (Baillie), Introduction. 
 
MOOZARAUT. 67 
 
 lawful, and when the produce is obtained, one half will go 
 to that other person in exchange for his labour, as declared 
 to him by the owner of the seed, and half to the owner of 
 the land in exchange for the usufruct of his land, as stipu- 
 lated with him by the owner of the seed, the owner of the 
 seed himself getting nothing. And if the land had been 
 given up to the first to work it with his seed, on condition 
 that the crop should be between them, in halves, and the 
 first should deliver it to the second to labour it with his 
 seed, on condition that the second should have two-thirds 
 of the produce, and the first one-third, and the second should 
 work it accordingly, he would have two-thirds of the pro- 
 duce; for the produce being an increase from his seed no one 
 can have any right to it, except by special agreement ; but as 
 he agreed for a third of the produce to the first, this third 
 will go to the landlord, who will also be entitled, as against 
 the first cultivator, to a hire or rent proportioned to the 
 third of his land. But suppose the seed to be furnished by 
 the first, the second would then have a third of the produce 
 as declared to him by the first cultivator, and the landlord 
 another third, he being also entitled, as against the first, to 
 another third, as the rent of his land. (Mubsoot.) A person 
 delivers up his land to another to sow with seed belonging 
 to them both, the cattle to be furnished by the cultivator, 1 on 
 condition that the crop shall be to both in halves, and the 
 cultivator makes a third party partner with him as to his 
 share, and he acts with him accordingly ; both the Moozd- 
 raut and the partnership are void, and the produce belongs 
 to the two original parties, in proportion to their seed, the 
 owner of the land having further a claim on the first culti- 
 vator for the rent of half the land, and the second labourer 
 having also a claim upon him for the hire of his labour, 
 because he worked under an invalid contract of hiring ; but 
 the first cultivator has no claim on the landlord for the hire 
 of his labour, because he worked in a matter in which he 
 was a partner, and has no right to hire for it, and the first 
 cultivator is bound to bestow in charity the surplus of his 
 
 1 Arab. Akkar. See ante, page 19, note 1, 
 
68 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 maintenance and of the value of his seed, because it is a 
 surplus which he has derived from the land of another under 
 an invalid lease. (Futawa Koobra.) 
 
 Sowing * A person gives up his land to another in Moozdraut. for 
 
 lands with- 
 out a con- & year, that the cultivator may sow it with his own seed; he 
 
 tract. does so, and then sows it again after the expiration of the 
 
 year, without the permission of the owner ; the owner being 
 informed of what has been done, does not sanction it, (it 
 matters not, whether before or after the springing of the 
 plant) ; it has been said that if it were the custom in that 
 village, 1 for the people to sow their lands, time after time, 
 without renewing their contracts, this would be lawful, and 
 the produce be divided among the parties, on the same terms 
 as stipulated for in the expired contract. But it is related of 
 Sheikh Ismaeel Al Zahid, that he declared, that this case is 
 mentioned in the book, 2 as being unlawful, and that the 
 cultivator is bound, after deducting an amount sufficient to 
 compensate him for his own labour and that of his cattle, 
 and also for his seed, to apply the remainders in charity, as 
 in a case of usurpation; and that he also declared, our 
 doctors were in the practice of deciding according to the 
 book, but " I have seen in other books that it is lawful, in 
 the same way, as if one should give up his land to a person, 
 and say, ( I have given up this land to you on the same 
 terms as such an one had it the former year,' which would 
 be lawful; and this is also to be preferred. He 3 has said, 
 " and in my opinion, if the land were prepared, or in a fit 
 condition to be given up in Moozdraut, and the share of the 
 labourer in the produce were well known among the people 
 of that village, 4 and there was no difference on the subject, 
 and a person should sow the land, it would be lawful on a 
 liberal construction of the law; but if the land were not 
 prepared or fit to be given up in Moozdraut, or if the share 
 
 * N.B. The authorities, from this to the end, are from Chapter 
 xiii. p. 415416. 
 
 1 Arab, kureeut. 
 
 2 It does not appear what book is referred to. 
 
 3 Who does not appear, unless Ismaeel himself is intended. 
 
 * Arab. Mowza, 
 
ON MOOZARAUT. 69 
 
 of the labourer in the produce were not known to be one or 
 uniform, but different among the people of that village, 
 (Mowza,) it would not be lawful, and the cultivator would 
 be an usurper ; regard being had to custom, if the fact of his 
 being an usurper is not ascertained ; but if it be known that 
 he sowed the land by usurpation, as for instance, if he had 
 declared at the time of sowing, that he sowed the land for 
 himself, and not in Moozdraut, or if he were a person who 
 does not take land in Moozdraut, being eminent or well 
 known as such, then it would be an act of usurpation, and 
 the crop would belong to him, but he would be responsible for 
 damage to the land. (Futawa Kazee Khan.) And I have 
 seen in some Futwas, as follows : l there are lands in a village, 2 
 either wukf or proprietary, and it is the custom of that vil- 
 lage, that whoever it may be, cultivates this land, without 
 asking permission from the superintendent of the wukf, and 
 neither proprietors nor the superintendent of proprietors 
 forbid them, but the labourers at the time of the ripening of 
 the corn, give the Dihkany 3 share, and do not refuse it. If 
 any one should cultivate such land without taking it in 
 Moozdraut from the owner 4 or superintendent, this sowing of 
 his is to be considered as by way of Moozdraut. But if it 
 be a mowza in which they always act with the permission of 
 the owner, and when any one acts without his permission, 
 the owner forbids, or the owner usually acts for himself; 
 then if any one should act without permission of the owner or 
 superintendent, we should treat it as a Moozdraut where the 
 land is wukf, but not so where it is proprietary. (Moheet.) 
 
 1 The whole of what follows is in Persian. 
 
 2 Persian, Deeh. 
 
 3 Tillage. It has other meanings. The share of the owner of 
 the Dih or village, seems to be intended. 
 
 4 Persian, Khoodawind, lord or master. 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 No. I. 
 
 TKANSLATION OF A FIRMAUN, CONCERNING THE COLLECTION OF 
 TRIBUTE, ISSUED BY THE EMPEROR ALUMGEER (AURUNGZEBE), 
 IN A.H. 1079, OR A.D. 1688. 
 
 [Copied from Mr. C. W. Boughton House's Dissertation concerning the 
 Landed Property of Bengal.'} 
 
 To the trusty Mahomed Hashem, whose hope is in the Appendix, 
 royal favor, be it known. That since by the blessings of 
 the grace and favor of the Lord of the earth and of the 
 heavens, whose benefits are great and universal, it has ever 
 been our desire, so to guide the reins of inclination in our 
 exalted designs, as to conform to the sacred text, which says, 
 " Of a truth the Lord commandeth that you act with justice 
 and with righteousness," so is it our earnest wish in all our 
 arrangements of weight and moment to follow the laws 1 
 prescribed by the most excellent of created beings 2 (upon 
 whom and upon his posterity, and companions, be the 
 sublimest blessings and peace), and by continually revolv- 
 ing in our enlightened mind, " That the earth and the 
 heavens stand firm through justice," perform our devotions 
 
 1 The Futawa Alumgeeree must have been completed before 
 the date assigned to this Firmaun, for it was commenced about 
 A.D. 1670. 
 
 " Moohummud. 
 
72 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 Appendix, towards Providence, and venerate His commands, by showing 
 pity and indulgence towards our subjects of every degree. 
 
 Wherefore, on the present fortunate occasion, we have 
 caused to be issued this sublime mandate, the emblem of 
 justice, in order that the Mutteseddies and Aumils now in 
 office, as well as those who may be hereafter employed in 
 the affairs of the protected dominions of Hindoostan, from 
 one extremity to the other, be informed in all points con- 
 cerning the Tribute, as to the quantity and mode directed 
 in the enlightened law of the pure and bright religion. To 
 this edict are subjoined the distinctions which are approved, 
 as being ascertained from good and authentic traditions, and 
 according to which they are to make the collections. They 
 shall not require an annual renovation of this edict; but 
 assure themselves that any deviation therefrom will make 
 them liable both to temporal and eternal punishment. 
 
 First. They must shew the ryotts every kind of favor 
 and indulgence, inquire into their circumstances, and endea- 
 vour, by wholesome regulations and wise administration, to 
 engage them with hearty good will, to labor towards the 
 increase of agriculture, so that no lands may be neglected 
 that are capable of cultivation. 
 
 Second. From the commencement of the year they shall, 
 as far as they are able, acquire information of the circum- 
 stances of every husbandman, 1 whether they are employed 
 in cultivation, or have neglected it. Then those who have 
 the ability, they shall excite and encourage to cultivate their 
 lands; and if they require indulgence in any particular 
 instances, let it be granted them. But if, upon examination, 
 it shall be found, that some who have the ability and are 
 assisted with water, nevertheless have neglected to cultivate 
 their lands, they shall admonish and threaten, and use force 
 and stripes In Klieraj Mowezzef? they shall acquire in- 
 
 1 " Moozarea r is commonly translated " husbandman," and it 
 is probable that it is the original word here. The whole tenor of 
 the passage indicates that the husbandmen are the Moozarea of 
 the state, and renders it highly probable that it refers to land of 
 which the state was the proprietor. 
 
 2 See ante, page 3, note 6. 
 
APPENDIX. 73 
 
 formation of the conduct of the proprietors of land from Appendix. 
 
 whom this tribute is to be collected, whether they cultivate 
 
 or not; 1 and if they learn that the husbandmen are unable 
 
 to provide the implements of husbandry, they shall advance 
 
 them money from government, in the way of Tekawy, and 
 
 take a security. 2 
 
 Third. In Kheraj Mowezzef, if the proprietor of the land, 
 for want of means of providing the implements of husbandry, 
 has been unable to cultivate it, or has deserted, leaving the 
 land uncultivated, they shall either give the land in farm, 
 or allow another to cultivate it (on account of the proprietor). 
 In case it is given in farm, they shall take the tribute out of 
 the farm; or if it is cultivated by another, from the pro- 
 prietor's share, 3 and if any balance remains, cause it to be 
 sent to the proprietor, or they shall appoint a person to 
 succeed the proprietor, who shall cultivate the land; and 
 after paying the tribute, whatever remains, he shall apply to 
 his own use. 4 When the proprietors of the land shall again 
 have the ability to cultivate them, they shall be restored to 
 them. 5 If a person deserts, leaving his land uncultivated, 
 they shall -not give it in farm during the remainder of that 
 year, but after the expiration of that year they shall give 
 it in farm. 6 
 
 Fourth. Let them obtain information of the parcels of 
 lands which, having fallen into disuse, have not been restored 
 to cultivation. If they are situated amongst highways and 
 roads, let them be annexed to the (neighbouring 7 ) city or 
 town, that somebody may cultivate them. If they are of 
 
 1 See page 13. 
 
 2 This is agreeable to Aboo Yoosuf s opinion, as stated page 15. 
 
 3 Alluding, apparently, to a case where the land is given in 
 Moozaraut. 
 
 4 The whole of this is in conformity with the course pointed 
 out in page 14, as proper to be adopted in the case of the pro- 
 prietor's inability to cultivate. 
 
 5 See page 15, at foot. 
 
 6 This accords with the Siraj-ool-wuhhaj, as quoted in page 16. 
 ? Where parentheses occur, they seem to have been added by 
 
 the translator, who was Mr. Gladwin. 
 
74 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 Appendix, other descriptions, let them examine the state of such lands. 
 Provided some part is cultivated, but is not very hopeful, 
 they shall not give molestation on account of the tribute of 
 such lands. If there are but small hopes from the remainder 
 (of bringing it back into cultivation), or if it has been all 
 along uncultivated ; in both cases, if that land is proprietary, 
 the proprietor being present, and capable of cultivating it, 
 let them admonish him to cultivate it. But if that land is 
 not proprietary, or the proprietor is not known, let them give 
 it to a person who is capable of cultivating it. Then if the 
 farmer is a Mussulman, and the aforesaid land is situated in 
 "the neighbourhood of Asheree land, let them agree with him 
 for Asher. If it lies near Kherajee land, or the farmer is an 
 infidel, they shall positively exact from him the Kheraj 1 
 (Mowezzef.) 2 In a case where such Kheraj is not proper, 
 they shall, according to the exigency of the occasion, settle 
 a rate for each Beegah, which is called KJieraj Mekettaat, 3 or 
 else settle for half of the established share of the produce, 
 which is called Mokossimeh. If the proprietor is known, but 
 is totally incapable of cultivating the land, provided that 
 land was heretofore settled for Kheraj Mokossimeh, let them 
 act conformably to the directions hereinafter given. 4 If it 
 was not Mokossimeh, they shall not give any molestation for 
 Asher, or for Kheraj (Mowezzef)', but in case of distress, 
 having advanced him Tekawy, they shall make him employ 
 himself in cultivation. 
 
 Fifth. If the proprietor of a piece of uncultivated ground 
 be known, let them leave it to him, and not suffer any other 
 to possess it. If the proprietor thereof is not known, and 
 the soil is not promising, they shall, according to the best of 
 
 1 This is agreeable to what is stated in page 3, as founded on 
 the opinions of Aboo Huneefa and Aboo Yoosuf. 
 
 2 The Wuzeefa or Moowuzzuf is always to be implied where 
 the Mookasimah is not particularly mentioned. 
 
 3 The explanation that precedes this word has probably been 
 inserted by the translator; for the literal meaning of the term 
 see page 16, note 2. 
 
 4 No direction after given is applicable to the case, unless what 
 immediately follows is intended. 
 
APPENDIX. 75 
 
 their judgment, give it to any one they shall think capable Appendix, 
 of managing it ; and if such an one do properly cultivate it, 
 they shall consider him the proprietor. If the land is capa- 
 ble of particular species of cultivation, and he acts in a 
 manner that prevents such a return from the soil (as might, 
 with proper management, be obtained) they shall hinder 
 him from so doing ; and they shall prevent him from enjoy- 
 ing the profits thereof, nor allow any person to possess such 
 land, or to be considered as the proprietor. 1 
 
 If a piece of ground has changed its proprietor, and 
 through his (the new proprietor's) mismanagement become 
 entirely desolate, they shall consider it as belonging to him 
 who possessed it before, and not allow this other to possess it. 
 
 Sixth. In a place where neither Asher nor Klieraj 
 (Mowezzef) are yet settled upon agriculture, they shall act 
 as directed in the law. 2 In a case of Kheraj (Mowezzef) 
 they shall settle for such a rate that the ryots may not be 
 ruined by the lands; and they shall not on any account 
 exact beyond (the value of) half of the produce, notwith- 
 standing any (particular) ability to pay more. 3 In a place 
 where (one or the other) is fixed, they shall take what has 
 been agreed for, provided that in Kheraj (Mowezzef) it does 
 not exceed half (of the produce in money) that the Ryots 
 may not be ruined. But if (what is settled appears to be 
 too much) they shall reduce the former Kheraj to what shall 
 be found proportionate to their ability ; however, if the capa- 
 city exceeds the settlement, they shall not take more. 4 
 
 Seventh. Commutations of Mowezzef and Mokossimeh 
 are allowable, provided the ryots are satisfied, but otherwise 
 they shall not make such alterations. 5 
 
 1 The whole of this paragraph relates to waste land, which 
 cannot be cultivated without the permission of the Imam, whom 
 the Sooltan is supposed to represent. See page 42. 
 
 2 That is, they will fix either Ooshr or Khiraj upon the lands 
 as may be agreeable to the general principles of the law. 
 
 3 It appears from this that they were at liberty to fix a Wuzeefa 
 or Mookassimdh XJuraj as they might think proper, but whatever 
 it might be, it was not in any case to exceed the extreme limit of 
 the Mookassimah. 
 
 4 See page 6. 5 See page 7. 
 
76 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 Appendix. Eight. The season for demanding the Kheraj Mowezzef 
 on every species is, when the harvest is fit for reaping; 1 
 therefore, from every particular species that shall arrive at 
 that state, they shall take the proportion of tribute. 2 
 
 Ninth. When a field that pays Kheraj Mowezzef, suffers 
 a partial injury, they shall make a careful investigation 
 thereof, and shall allow a fair and equitable deduction, ac- 
 cording to the degree of injury, 3 and in taking the tribute 
 from the remainder, they shall do it in such manner, that 
 the ryots may enjoy a complete half (of what the crop ought 
 to have produced). 
 
 Tenth. In Kheraj Mowezzef. Whosoever, notwithstanding 
 he possesses the ability to cultivate his own land, and meets 
 with no impediment, nevertheless suffers it to be uncultivated; 
 let them exact the tribute from other means. If in particu- 
 lar cases, from inundation, or from want of rain before the 
 reaping of the harvest, it suffers such a degree of injury that 
 the seed thereof doth not come to his hand, and there remain 
 not sufficient time for him to cultivate again that year, they 
 shall consider the tribute to have ceased. But if the injury 
 shall happen after the reaping, even if there be a total loss, 
 such as having been eaten by cattle, &c., or if there remain 
 sufficient time for a second cultivation (in that year) they 
 shall exact the tribute. 4 
 
 Eleventh. If the proprietor of land paying Mowezzef 
 cultivates it himself, and dies before he had paid the tribute 
 of that year, and the harvest comes to the hands of his heirs, 
 they shall exact the tribute from the heirs. 5 If the afore- 
 said defunct died before he had cultivated the land, arid there 
 was not remaining sufficient time for cultivating it in that 
 year, they shall not exact anything. 
 
 Twelfth. In Mowezzef. If the proprietor gives his own 
 ground in farm, or lends it to another, and the farmer or 
 
 1 Though the proprietor becomes liable at the beginning of the 
 year, according to Aboo Huneefa (page 21), it does not follow that 
 the debt is then payable ; on the contrary, to exact it then would 
 be taking it in advance, and mere oppresssion. (Ante, page 10.) 
 
 2 See page 21. 3 Page 6. 
 
 * See page 18. 5 Page 21, note 2. 
 
APPENDIX. 77 
 
 borrower cultivates it, the tribute shall be exacted from the Appendix. 
 
 proprietor. 1 If either of them makes a garden on it, they 
 
 shall demand the tribute from the farmer or the borrower. 
 
 If any one takes possession of (such) tributary land, and 
 
 denies having done so, provided the proprietor has witnesses, 
 
 and the usuper has cultivated the ground, they shall exact 
 
 the tribute from the usurper; but if he has not cultivated it, 
 
 they shall not exact the tribute from either. If the usurper 
 
 denies the fact, and the proprietor cannot produce witnesses, 
 
 they shall exact the tribute from the proprietor. In a case 
 
 of mortgage, they shall act the same as directed concerning 
 
 an usurper; provided the mortgagee has cultivated the land 
 
 without the permission of the mortgager. 2 
 
 Thirteenth. In Kheraj Mowezzef. If a person sells part 
 of his own such tributary land, which is arable, and produces 
 only one crop (in the year), provided there remains sufficient 
 time to cultivate in that year, and the buyer has taken pos- 
 session, (seeing that) if he wishes to cultivate in that year, 
 nobody can hinder him, therefore the tribute shall be exacted 
 from him, but otherwise it shall be taken from the seller. 
 If it produces two crops (in one year) one of which has 
 been enjoyed by the seller, and the other by the buyer, the 
 tribute shall be equally divided between them. If on that 
 land there is a crop fit for reaping, the tribute shall be taken 
 from the seller. 3 
 
 Fourteenth. In Mowezzef. If any person builds a house 
 upon his own ground (which was cultivated) he shall pay the 
 same tribute that he paid before; and the same if he lias 
 planted trees that do not produce fruit. If a cultivated 
 spot, that paid the Kheraj Mowezzef is converted into a gar- 
 den, and the whole closely planted with fruit tress, they shall 
 exact 2-f rupees, being the rate for a garden, 4 although the 
 
 1 Conformable to page 8. 
 
 2 All this is in exact conformity with what is stated in page 8. 
 
 3 See page 9. 
 
 4 Compare with page 20. As the rate for a garden was 10 
 dirhems, this shews that in the time of Aurangzebe 10 dirhems 
 were equal to 2f rupees, which would give only 4|ths anas for 
 the value of a dirhem. 
 
78 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 Appendix, tress have not yielded fruit, excepting upon vines and 
 almond tress, whereon tribute is not due until they bear 
 fruit ; but when they produce fruit, they shall exact from 
 them 2f rupees, upon the supposition that a lawful Beegah, 
 measuring 45 Shahjehany or 60 lawful Guz, square, will 
 yield 5 rupees, but otherwise they shall take half of the 
 actual produce. If the value of the produce is less than a 
 fourth of a rupee, in the proportion of one seer out of five 
 Shahjehany seers of grain, they shall not take it according 
 to such deficiency. * 
 
 If an infidel sells his land to a Mussulman, notwith- 
 standing his being a Mussulman, they shall exact from him 
 Kheraj" (Mowezzef). 
 
 Fifteenth. If any one dedicates his own land to the use 
 of a public burying-ground, or for a serai, they shall con- 
 sider the tribute to have ceased. 
 
 Sixteenth. In Kheraj Mokossimeh. Every one who is 
 not the (hereditary) proprietor of such Kheraj land, whether 
 infidel or Mussulman, having bought it, or taken it in 
 mortgage, shall receive the profits with permission (of 
 government). From whatever is produced on that land 
 they shall exact the settled rate of tribute, provided it be 
 not more than half (of the produce), in which case they 
 shall reduce it ; but if it is less than the third, they shall 
 increase it as far as they may deem fit. 
 
 Seventeenth. If the proprietor of Mokossimeh land dies, 
 and leaves not any heirs ; in giving that land in farm, or to 
 be cultivated, &c., they shall act in the manner already 
 directed under the head of Mowezzef. 
 
 Eighteenth. In Mokossimeh. If an injury happens to 
 the harvest, upon as much as is damaged, they shall not 
 exact the tribute, and whether the injury happens to the 
 grain before or after reaping, they shall exact the tribute 
 from (only) what remains (good). 3 
 
 1 So in the copy, but I do not understand what it means. 
 
 2 Page 7. 
 
 3 See ante, page 19. 
 
APPENDIX. 79 
 
 No. II. 
 
 FIRMAN FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF A JAGEER. 1 
 
 [This and the remaining numbers of the Appendix are copied from Dr. 
 Francis Balfour's translation of THE FORMS OF HBRKERN. The 
 Originals are in Persian.] 
 
 At this time the mandate of high dignity hath obtained Appendh 
 the honor of manifestation, viz. that, in consequence of the 
 removal of the flower of great noblemen Mirza Feridoon, 
 I have confirmed, by way of Jageer, from the beginning of 
 the season of Autumn, the sum of twenty-one lacks of dams, 2 
 out of the Purgunneh of Khizrabad, as it is specified on the 
 back of the Firman, to the approved in service, the atten- 
 dant of our imperial presence, Nadir Khan. It is required 
 that the Chowdries, Kanongoes, Muckuddims, and peasantry 
 of the said Pergunneh, having acknowledged the person 
 above named Jageerdar of that place, and having given an 
 account of the just rent, 3 and of the duties of Diwani, ac- 
 cording to the established agreement, to the agents of the 
 said Khan, shall in no respect occasion any diminution or 
 deduction; and whatever the former Jageerdar shall have 
 collected from the said crop, having taken it back, let them 
 give it to to him; considering this as peremptory, and having 
 acted according to royal command, let them deliver it up. 
 
 1 This word is compounded of two Persian words, viz. ja (place) 
 and geer (take,) imperative of the verb Girifteen to seize, but here 
 taken for the participle Geerindu, seizer or taker. The combina- 
 tion means properly place taker, but it is commonly used as a 
 substantive noun, and hence irregularly construed with the word 
 Dor, or holder, as Jageerdar. 
 
 2 According to the Ayeen Akbery there are 40 dams in a 
 rupee; and the sum would therefore be Rs. 52,500 or about 
 5,250. 
 
 3 Mai Wajilee ; Arabic words that signify literally " property 
 due or necessary," but here evidently applied to the revenue or 
 Khiraj. See ante, page 65, note. 
 
80 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 No. III. 
 
 PERWANNEH 1 FOR HOLDING A JAGEER. 
 
 Appendix. Whereas, according to the world-subjecting sun-resplen- 
 dent mandate, the sum of five lacks of dams, in the Per- 
 gunneh of Feridabad, in consequence of the removal of the 
 noble and princely Mozuffer Khan, having been bestowed 
 and conferred on the illustrious and noble Behader Khan, 
 by way of Jageer, from the commencement of the season 
 of Autumn; and a second time represented on the 21st 
 of Jummadissani, the Sabtfi is now drawing out a royal 
 commission for this purpose, it is required that the Chow- 
 dries, Kanoongoes, and husbandry of the said Pergunneh, 
 having acknowledged the said person Jageerdar of that 
 place, shall give an account of the just rent and dues of the 
 Dewani, to the agent of the said Khan, and shall not with- 
 hold or deduct a single dam from that sum. And whatever 
 the former Jageerdar shall have collected, after deducting 
 the dues of collection, let it be returned to the agent of the 
 present Jageerdar, considering this as peremptory, let them 
 act according to instructions. 
 
 1 The Firman may be said to constitute the Jageer. The Per- 
 wanneh is a requisition addressed to the officers of the Pergunneh 
 to recognize the person appointed as Jageerdar, so that there are 
 properly a Firman and Perwanneh for each Jageer, though this 
 Perwanneh happens to relate to a different appointment than is 
 contained in the preceding Firman. 
 
 A person whose duty is to make out Commissions. (Half our.) 
 
 2 
 
APPENDIX. 81 
 
 No. IV. 
 
 PERWANNEH TO A JAGEERDAR ON THE SUBJECT OF A 
 COMPLAINT. 
 
 It is signified to the agent of the Jageerdar of the Per- Appendix. 
 gunneh of Goheram, that at this time Gunher Saho has 
 come and complained that he has a demand on Dowlet 
 Khan, the Afghan (for a sum borrowed upon bond), who is 
 dilatory and obstinate in the payment of it; it is required 
 that if this be the case, they will cause him to pay whatever 
 is due ; that he who is in the right may receive justice. 
 And if it be otherwise, let him submit the affair to the 
 decision of the noble law ; that violence may not be allowed. 
 Let him consider this as positive. 
 
82 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 No. V. 
 
 FIRMAN FOR A MAINTENANCE. 1 
 
 Appendix. At this time the fortunate and auspicious edict has 
 obtained the honor of proclamation, and the dignity of pub- 
 lication, viz. that I have granted the extent of 300 Begas of 
 land, half sowed, half fallow, out of the Pergunneh of 
 Illahidadpoor of the district of Kinnowj, by way of mainte- 
 nance for the reverend and excellent, the. perfect and pure 
 shaikh Abdulghufar, and his posterity, 2 from the season of 
 autumn: that having applied its revenues to his own use, 
 season after season, and year after year, he may dedicate 
 his study and attention to praying for the continuance of our 
 daily increasing prosperity. It is required that the superiors 
 and managers of that Pergunneh having measured and 
 marked out the said land in a good situation, shall leave it 
 at the disposal of the person above mentioned. After the 
 boundaries are ascertained, let them not encroach upon it. 
 And on account of rent and duties, such as Kunurra, 
 Paishkush, measurement money, and fees of entry, and all 
 the extortions 3 of the Dewany, and demands of government, 
 let them occasion him no trouble. And having considered 
 him as free, and exempted from all kinds of taxation, let 
 them not require every year a fresh Firman or Perwaneh. 
 Having acted according to command, let them make no 
 resistance. 
 
 1 Mudud maash ; a compound of two Arabic words, which 
 signify assistance and living. 
 
 2 Furzundan, plural of Furzund, child. It has a technical 
 meaning, which is given in the Introduction. 
 
 8 This word is curious, as occurring in a royal Firman. It is, 
 perhaps, a little too strong for the original, which means, lite- 
 rally, vexations or troubles. 
 
APPENDIX. 83 
 
 No. VI. 
 
 PERWANNEH FOB A MAINTENANCE. 
 
 Let the Muttissuddies of important affairs for the present Appendix, 
 and future, of the Pergunneh of Fereedabad know, that 
 whereas, agreeable to our auspicious mandate, the extent of 
 an hundred and fifty Beegahs of land, half cultivated and 
 half fallow, is given by way of maintenance out of the said 
 Pergunneh, from the beginning of the autumnal season, to 
 the reverend and learned Abdirreheem ; 1 it is required that, 
 agreeable to the order, having measured and marked out 
 the said land in a good spot, they shall put it into the afore- 
 said's possession ; that having, every season, appropriated the 
 revenue of it to his own use, he may be employed in prayer 
 for our daily increasing prosperity. And on account of 
 rent and expences, let them by no manner of means give 
 him any trouble. And let them not every year require a 
 renewal of his Firman and Perwanneh. Let them consider 
 this as positive, and act as directed. 
 
 1 It will be observed that there is no allusion to posterity here. 
 
84 THE LAND TAX OF INDIA. 
 
 No. VII. 
 
 FIRMAN FOR A PREFERMENT AND REMOVAL. 
 
 Appendix. As the attention of our august soul is dedicated to the 
 tranquillity of the state, and to the management of the 
 affairs of our old servants who have spent their precious 
 lives in labour and attachment, with perfect honesty and 
 fidelity ; on this account, the ancient in service, the cream 
 of our sincere well-wishers, the pattern of our servants, 
 devoted from attachment, Khajeh Ibraheem, who was long 
 ago appointed to the respectable office of paymaster to our 
 successful army, and has at no time polluted the mantle of 
 his inclination with the dust of embezzlement or neglect; 
 and performed the duties of that office according to the plea- 
 sure of our most pure and princely soul ; as the frailty of 
 mortality and infirmity has now overcome him, regarding 
 the length of his service, and natural attachment, and out 
 of our royal indulgence excusing him from duty, we have 
 given him by way of perpetual gift the sum of five lacks of 
 dams out of the Pergunneh of Beherampoor, his usual 
 abode, in compliance with his own request; that having 
 dedicated that sum season after season, and year after year, 
 to his own use, he may employ his diligence and attention 
 in praying for our eternal prosperity. It is required that 
 the officers and agents and Jageerdars, both now and here- 
 after, having acted according to our sacred command, and 
 having measured and marked out the land for the sum spe- 
 cified, in a good place, shall put it into the aforesaid's posses- 
 sion. And having considered him as free and exempted 
 from every taxation and all public burdens, let them in no 
 respect give his agents any trouble. With regard to the 
 Chowdhries, Kanoongoes, Muckuddims, and farmers of tha 
 place, let them account for the lawful rent and dues of the 
 Dewanny to the agent of that old servant ; and let them 
 occasion no diminution or deduction ; and let them not de- 
 viate from his commands. 
 
INDEX 
 
 ARABIC AND PERSIAN TERMS 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 A 
 
 
 Buludu . . 
 
 . 40 
 
 Aad .... 
 
 41 
 
 Bustomittur 
 
 li 
 
 Abwab 
 
 . xl 
 
 Bye-al-wufa 
 
 8 
 
 Adee .... 
 
 . 36 
 
 
 
 Ahleeut 
 
 . 23 
 
 D 
 
 
 Ahl-oos-shooft 
 
 . 50 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 1 . 
 
 
 79 
 
 .Aimman . 
 
 X1V1 
 
 Dar 
 
 26 
 
 Ajum .... 
 
 
 
 
 Akhiz .... 
 
 . 36 
 
 Dar 
 
 . 79 
 
 Akid .... 
 
 . 54 
 
 Dar-ool-Islam 
 
 . 44 
 
 Akkar 
 
 19 
 
 Dar-ool-hurb 
 
 . 44 
 
 AT,-. 
 
 
 Deeh 
 
 69 
 
 AKr .... 
 
 Altumgha . 
 
 . xlvi 
 
 Deyn . . . . 
 
 66 
 
 Amil .... 
 
 12 
 
 Dihkany .... 
 
 69 
 
 Ashir . . 
 
 5 
 
 Dirhem .... 
 
 4 
 
 Astar .... 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 Awlad. 
 
 . xlviii 
 
 F 
 
 
 Aymah 
 Ayn .... 
 
 . xlvi 
 . 66 
 
 Fakeer 
 Fakeeran . 
 
 li 
 li 
 
 B 
 
 
 Fee 
 
 . 33 
 
 Badshah 
 
 . xliv 
 
 Fellah 
 Fina 
 
 . XXV 
 
 41 
 
 Bazunjan 
 
 . 25 
 
 Furz 
 
 23 
 
 Beit-ool-mal 
 
 12 
 
 Furzund .... 
 
 . xlviii 
 
 Beni Tooghlib , 
 Betai . . 
 
 3 
 . xliii 
 
 Furzundan . 
 
 . xlviii 
 
 Bheree 
 
 xlii 
 
 
 
 Bostan 
 
 4 
 
 G 
 
 
 Bruhmuttur 
 
 li 
 
 Ghanimeen .... 
 
 2 
 
 Buhar .... 
 
 . 28 
 
 Ghuneemut .... 
 
 2 
 
86 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 H 
 
 Hakim 
 Hookm 
 Hujur 
 Hureem 
 
 I. 
 Ihya .... 
 
 PAGE 
 
 . 44 
 . 44 
 . 43 
 . 46 
 
 42 
 
 Mai wajibce 
 Mazoon 
 Meeras 
 Meerasdar . 
 Mithkal 
 Mobah 
 Mohutturan 
 Mooamilut . 
 Moocurrery 
 
 PAGE 
 
 . 79 
 7 
 . xxxii 
 . xxxii 
 5 
 . 42 
 H 
 55 
 1 
 55 
 
 Ihya-ool-muwat . 
 
 . 40 
 xxvi 
 
 Mookasimah 
 
 3 
 16 
 
 Irak 
 
 1 
 
 
 . 23 
 
 Mookatib 
 
 7 
 
 
 li 
 
 Mookhuttut -le -hoo 
 Mookussur . 
 
 . 38 
 
 . 47 
 . 36 
 
 J. 
 
 Jageer 
 
 . 79 
 
 *7Q 
 
 Moonut 
 Moostamin . 
 
 . 24 
 13 
 
 Jahilee 
 Jihad 
 Jizyut 
 Jureeb 
 
 K. 
 
 Khidmut . . ' . 
 
 . 38 
 . . 32 
 2 
 5 
 
 xxxix 
 1 
 
 
 . 30 
 
 Mouza 
 Mouzahwar 
 
 55 
 . xlii 
 . xxii 
 
 Moowuzzuf . 
 Moozaraut . 
 Moozarea 
 Mudd .... 
 Mudud-maash 
 
 3 
 
 52 
 12 
 55 
 
 82 
 
 Khirajee 
 Khoodawind 
 Khoodkasht 
 Khooms 
 Khoosroo 
 Kirm .... 
 Kowm 
 Kufeez 
 
 1 
 
 . 69 
 
 . XXX 
 
 . 36 
 . 19 
 4 
 . 14 
 5 
 
 N 
 Nazih 
 
 . 47 
 
 Nirik .... 
 Nisab . 
 Noozool 
 Nuwayecb . 
 Nuzr .... 
 
 O 
 
 . XXX 
 
 . 25 
 . xliii 
 . xl 
 . xxxviii 
 
 . xlviii 
 
 
 . 38 
 
 
 68 
 
 M. 
 Ma ... 
 
 36 
 
 Maee .... 
 Madin 
 
 Mai . 
 Malik . 
 
 . 36 
 . 36 
 . 65 
 
 8 
 
 
 . xlviii 
 
 Ooshr 
 
 1 
 
 Ooslirec 
 
 1 
 
INDEX. 
 
 87 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 
 PAGE 
 
 p 
 
 
 Sooluhee 
 
 , . xiii 
 
 Paragoody . 
 
 . xxxii 
 
 Sowad . 
 
 2 
 
 Paykasht . . . 
 
 . XXX 
 
 Sudka . 
 
 . xlix 
 
 Peeruttur 
 
 li 
 
 Sunud , 
 
 xxxix 
 
 Pergunnah . 
 
 . XXX 
 
 
 
 Peshkush . 
 
 XX 
 
 
 T 
 
 Puttee 
 
 . xli 
 
 Talook 
 
 xxxviii 
 
 Putteedaree . 
 
 . xli 
 
 Talookdar . 
 
 xxxviii 
 
 Puttony 
 
 . lii 
 
 Theeka. 
 
 . XXX 
 
 Pyacoody 
 
 xxxii 
 
 Thoke . 
 
 . xiii 
 
 Pyacurry 
 
 xxxii 
 
 Tooghlibee . 
 
 . 27 
 
 Pyacust 
 
 xxxii 
 
 Tuhjeer 
 
 . 43 
 
 R 
 
 
 
 U 
 
 
 53 
 
 TThl 
 
 1 / 
 
 Raee .... 
 
 . XXV 
 
 U 111 . . 
 
 Uml . 
 
 * ID 
 
 55 
 
 Rayut .... 
 
 . XXV 
 
 Usul. . 
 
 . xl 
 
 Rikaz .... 
 
 . 30 
 
 Utun . 
 
 . 47 
 
 Rootbut 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 Rubb-ool-urz 
 
 8 
 
 
 W 
 
 Rutl .... 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 Ryotwar 
 
 . xliii 
 
 Wukf . '. 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 Wusk . 
 
 . 25 
 
 S 
 
 
 Wuzeefa 
 
 3 
 
 Saa . . . . 
 
 5 
 
 
 z 
 
 Sahib-ool-Khuttut 
 
 . 38 
 
 
 
 Sahib -ool-Urz 
 
 11 
 
 Zeeut . 
 
 .... 17 
 
 Sayer .... 
 
 . xxiv 
 
 Zimmee 
 
 3 
 
 Scerut 
 
 . 32 
 
 Zira . 
 
 5 
 
 Shoofa. 
 
 50 
 
 Zubtee 
 
 . xliii 
 
 Shooft 
 
 50 
 
 Zukat . 
 
 . 23 
 
 Sir shikun . 
 
 . lii 
 
 Zumeen 
 
 xxxviii 
 
 
 32 
 
 Zumeendar . 
 
 xxxviii 
 
 Sooluh . 
 
 . xiii 
 
 Zurau . 
 
 . 52 
 
THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS 
 
 WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN 
 THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY 
 WILL INCREASE TO SO CENTS ON THE FOURTH 
 DAY AND TO $1.OO ON THE SEVENTH DAY 
 OVERDUE. 
 
 ^T 
 
 LD 21-20m-5, '39 (9269s) 
 
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 

 s M! wj 
 
 "! \ : 'ii ? fp'*ij 
 
 flH):'! Jl