CHAPTER

WALTER LAWRENCE'S SETTLEMENT

I I I

CHAPTER I I I

WAI/TER LAWRENCE*S SETTLEMENT

One of the most ifiportant events of *toharaja Pratap Singh's

reign was the revenue settlement o f Kashmir. It was in 1887 that

Andrew Wingate started his settlement operations in Kashmir.*

During his stay in Kashmir he made the survey of two tehalla in

the Valley, namely Lal and Phak.2 He was an efficient and deligent

officer who seems to have clearly understood the root cause of

sufferings of Kashmiri people. He felt the necessity of amelio­

rating the condition of Kashmiri peasants whom he regarded as

“a machine to produce Shall for a very large and mostly idle

population."^ H® found the cultivator having no rights either to

his land or to his crops. '•The Pandits and the city population,"

remarks he, "have the right to be well fed whether there is a

famine or not • • • * * His recommendations to reform the existing

revenue machinery were somewhat of a radical nature. Wingate

recommended a survey and new settlement of all cultivable land in

1. JStfC State Archives, Pol. Deptt. No. 45 of 1889.2 . Andrew Wingate, PetUfInm r. fttPfiEt X h ft, SflStUtSMlrt

Qfterfttlon in Janm and Kashmir. 1888, pp. 530 .3 . Ib id .

82

the State; reduction in taxation; drastic changes in the

revenue mach inery; wore rights to the peasants including

hereditary and proprietary ownership of land; and abolition

of forced labour.* Maharaja Pratap Singh was, from the very

beginning# suspicious of the British designs towards Kashmir

State.® He suspected Wingate*s 'enlightened' ideas as an act

of British imperialism to curtail his authority in his own

dominion. The Maharaja had become more powerful in 1888 when

he dismissed the Lachman Das ministry and took the administration

in his own hands. Besides i'feharaja, there were several sections

of the population which opposed any kind of change in the old

feudal system - the Dogra bureaucracy which always considered

the valley to be the main source of income for the Docrra R5 1;

tljre Pandit Jactirdars who owned most of the landed property in the

7Valley and resented any reform concerning land; the revenue

officials who disliked any type of check in their process of

gexploitation of the masses; and even the city people who were

living at the expense of the villagers. Finding his work

obstructed at each step, Wingate left the State for good.*®

4 . Ibid. See also W .R. Lawrence, The Valiev of Kashmir, pp. 430-32. 6* For details. See Supra chapter I*6 . It is pertinent to note that the Kashmir Valley was still

considered to be a 'prized colony' by the Dogra rulers andany voice that was raised in favour of more rights for Kashmiri peasants was described as an act of treason in the Durbar.Robert Thorp lost his life as he had raised his voice against the atrocities of the Dogra Raj. It is suspected that Robert Thorp was poisoned by the State officials, as he had refused to leave the State. For details,see S.N . Gadru, Kashmir

Sffigqia* p .v h .7 . E .F . Knight, Where Three Empires Meet, p .2 9 .8 . Ibid., pp. 400-02.9 . Ibid., pp. 405-11.

10* !*>ld., p .424.

83

When Walter R* Lawrence succeeded Wingate as the

Settlement Commissioner,** the political situation in Kashmir

had considerably Changed; the personal rule of Pratap Singh

had come to an end, and, the State Council, under the

supervision of Government of India, had begun to function.

However, Lawrence too found himself in a difficult situation

as the vested interests in the land again tried to hinder the

12progress of reform. He also found the condition of peasantry

in the State quite deplorable who were literally crushed under

the burden of taxes. "Everything, save air and water," Lawrence

13records, "was under taxation." Variation in soil, fertility,

climatic conditions, irrigation etc. made it unrealistic to

inpose an uniform rate over all areas. An important problem,

therefore, which beset Lawrence was how to decide about the

unit to be valued for land revenue.

Lawrence found the existing system of assessing a group

of villages at the same rates defective as there were hundreds

of tenants in an assessed group of villages.** It is necessary

to note that although the peasant's produce largely varied from

one another, they had to pay the same amount of revenue. This

is shown by the fact that the village* were separated by the/

11. Ibid.. p .400. See also Imperial Gazetteer of India, Jammu and Kashmir State, 1924, p . 14; Arthur Nave. The Tourists guide to Kashmir.'Ladakh,. Sfeardn_e_tc. , p .v i l l , m. Hashmatullah than, flikhtasir Tarlkh-1-Jamntti etc.. p .75. Francis Younghusband.

pp. 190-92.12. Walter Lawrence, Qp.cit. . pp .433-34.13 . Lawrence, op .clt. . p .417.14. Ibid. . p .436.

84

mountains, valleys and rivers and there were curious

differences in the fertility of the adjoining villages of

apparently the same soil and of the same advantages as

15regards irrigation, configuration etc. For example, in the

high villages water was abundant, but it was cold and only

inferior kinds of rice were grown. There was vast difference

in irrigation facilities in lower, or palab and the upper, or

Sirab villages. Several fields in a village with fertile land

and better irrigation facilities produced less due to the

shadow of mountains over their fields , yet they paid more

revenue than those which produced more on account of their being

exposed to the Sun*s course. Every village widely varied in

irrigation facilities, but this factor was not taken into

16consideratlon previously. Several villages situated at the

vicinity of the forests, where bears and foxes abounded, often

lost a big portion of their crops, while the fields situated on

the sides of river Jehlum or water-logged swanp land were more

exposed to floods. Yet no concessions were given to them. It

was, therefore, not an easy task to determine the value of land

and liawrence came to the conclusion that for the purposes of

assessment in Kashmir, a village was a large and dangerous

17generalisation. He, therefore, decided to treat a holding and

18not a village as the unit of measurement.

15. Ibid. , p .434.16. Ibid. , p .435 .1 7 . t | e .18. Ibid. , p . 436.

85

Lawrence carried on his settlement operations in a

systematic way. He drew up a map of every village on a scale

generally of 24 inches to a mile in order to show more accurately

19every field cm the map. As measuremert proceeded# all the

facts were recorded on a prescribed form relating to each field

concerning area# class of lalnd# source of irrigation# number

20and kind of trees# revenue payable etc*

Lawrence classified soil in the Kaghmlfcr Valley as follows*2*

D ^bi ( Irrigated )

(2 ) Galr Abi (^ irr ig a te d )

The Abi land included the followings

Abi I - kand producing rice regularly.

Abi II- I*and producing rice occasionally.

Abi IIX- land producing crops other than rice.

The Gair Abi land Included the followings23

Warl - Sloping manured land.

'4a id an i - Xjevel manured.

I«abru - Sloping unmanured.

The above distinctions were based on the sufficiency or

19 . w .S . Talbot# gate ...oft S ^ t le m e nft.P°XXSX and Ooexftfc 3,30.3. o f tt^eJammu and Kashmir state . 1906. p . l .

2 0 . Ibjdi See F . Younahusband. o p .c lt . . p . 188.2 1 . Assessment Report of Srl Pratap S inqh Pura. 1902# p p .8 and 52.2 2 . J&K State Archives. P o l.D ep tt . No.56/J*-73 o f 1902 .2 3 . Assessment Report of S r iP r a t a p Singh. Pura# 1902# p p .8 and 85.

86

otherwise of water supply. In addition to the above classes,

25there were two raore classes known as*

Sagazar - Vegetable plots; and

Nautor - Waste land

In Jammu Province, the classification of the 3oil was as

follows:26

Chahi - Ijand irrigated from wells.

Saliaba - Iiand situated adjacent to the bank streamor naturally irrigated by flood.

Gora - Iiand adjacent to the village site which received the village drainage and night soil.

Heli - Manured land.

Lawrence divided the entire area into assessment circles. In

each assessment, estimate of average produce were obtained by

conducting crop cutting experiments for different crops. Cfo the

basis of prevailing prices, gross assets for each circle were

worked out. Out of these, certain deductions were made on account

of some requirement of the peasant, like cost of cultivation,

seeds, draught, animals etc. and finally the revenue rates were

determined as a percentage of the net assets. To those revenue

rates were added a Pat war and kambardarl cesses. The assessment

27so arrived at was then announced to the landholders.

24. w.S. Talbot, op .cit.. p .l .25. J&K State Archives, Pol. Deptt. No. 56/H-73 of 1902.26. Assessment Report of the Kathujl Tehsil, 1924, p . 5.27. l*awrence, op..clt. , p .436.

24

87

Thus it is d if f ic u lt to sura up any uniform rate of land

revenue that the State charged from the peasantry a fter the

settlem ent. However, d iffe ren t sources have referred to i t as

2Qth irty per cent of the gross produce. m some Tehslls o f the

Jammu Province where the State did not claim exclusive proprietary

rights, the standard was "h a lf net assets ’* o r h a l f of the net

p ro fits of the proprietors from the land cultivated by the

29tenants . In Ladakh, the landrevenue demand was fixed at th irty

p er cent of the total produce which varied from Teh s il to T eh s11 .

The revenue was realised in cash.

An inportant feature of Lawrence's Settlement appertained

30to the ownership of land .'

31During the Maghal rule, A w hile Zamindars were the revenue

c o lle ct in9 agents, the peasants were recognised as the owners oftho

land . The State de-rand on agricultural produce was defined by

Abul Fazl in several terms - "The wages of guard ingi' " "The

emoluments of r u l i n g " , ^ "The Wages of s o v e r e ig n t y ," ^ or "The

36Price of p r o t e c tio n .“ Though the peasant was considered to be

2 8 . W .S . Talbot, o p .c l t . . p . 3 ; J&K State Archives, P o l.D ep tt .N o .64 of 1905 .

2 9 . W .S. Talbot, o p .c l t . . p . 3? See J&K State Archives P o l .D e p tt . No. 1 3 5 /L .R . o f 1902 .

3 0 . JShn w„ Sa lmond w rites, "We may define the right of ownership in a material thing as the general, permanent and inheritable right to the uses of that t h in g ." Jurisprudence, p . 395 . Salmond further adds, "The fu ll power o f a lienatio n and d ispo sition is an almost invariable element in the right of ownership, but cannot be regarded as e s sen tia l , o r included in the d e fin it io n of i t . " Ib id .

3 1 . I *H * Quresbi, The Administration of Mughal Government. p . 2 87 ;U.sr. Day, The ^ a h a l Government, p . 9 9 ; S ir Jadunath Sarkar,f*iqhaI M t i In is t rat.ion, pp . 51-60; W .H . Moreland, The Agrarian gyatefl_Qf Muslim India , p . 117 .

3 2 . Abul Fazl , A in Akbarl* P . 2 91 . 3 3 . Ib id . , p . 2923 4 . Ib id . , p . 297 . 35 . Ib id . . p . 298 . 3 6 . Ib id . , p . 300 .

88

the own^r of the land during the Jiaghal rule In Kashmir# h is

condition# however# was deplorable . In particular# the practice

of farming out of lands ( H ara d a ri) which was resorted to

during the period of later Mughals continued to be the bane of

agrarian adm inistration under the Afghans and the Sikhs . It is ,

however, irrportant to note that the proprietary rights of the

37peasants were never challanged in the p re-Dogra period .

With the establishment o f the Dogra rule# the pattern of

agrarian relations began to change in Kashmir. As a result of

the Treaty of Amritsar# new rights in the land began to emerge?

the Dogra Maharajas always considered themselves to be the

38superior owners of land, the source of th e ir claim being both

conquest and purchase. However# In spite o f the notion of superior

39ownership of lan3 vested in the Maharaja# the Dogra adminis­

tration worked d irectly to create a new class of landed aristo «racy .

The new class of landowners started a process of extending

40th e ir ownership rights over every b it of land. For th is purpose#

they expelled the cultivators having proprietary rights over the

lands# and employed peasants from other v illages who cultivated

th e ir land as labourers. Thus the cultivators were reduced to

d estitutio n and were forced to m igrate .41 The disastrous famine

3 7 . M. Ishaq Khan# Perspectives on Kashmir. H istorical D 1-nensions (in print)

3 8 . See above.

3 9 . J *K State Archives, Gen. Pol. Deptt. No. 191/H-75 of 1918 .4 0 . O .N . Dhar, o p .c it . . p . 7 4 .4 1 . Lawrence# on. c i t . . p . 4 11 ; D . k . JoShi# A New Deal in

Kashmir, p . 20 .

89

of 1877-79 swept o ff a large part of the v a l le y 's population .

Thousands of people le ft the valley for the p la ins leaving

behind them a large chunk of uncultivated la n d .4 '* A fter famine

44several peasants are said to have returned to the valley .

When the settlement of 1880 was made, it became quite d i f f ic u l t

fo r the fugitives to prove th e ir hereditary right of cultivation

on the lands previously held by them. Thus the peasants in

certain cases became landless labourers whereas a large body of

46them were reduced to the position of ‘s e r fs * .

4?

Wingate had realized that the agrarian system in Kashmir

could not be reformed unless the proprietary right of land was

not given to the cultivators . He believed that the 3tate could

not protect it s e lf without the assistance of the cultivators,

and no land settlement could last long which would not engage

the active syrrpathies of the agricultural population in support

47of the state p o lic y . He, therefore, recommended not only the

grant of permanent occupany rights to the peasants but even th e ir

JOright to "sa le , mortgage or tran sfer " land . Wingate was fu lly

convinced that the peasants would be able to pay land revenue

only when they were made the owners of the so il in the real sen«e .

4 2 . Punjab Adminiatrat ion Reports. 1878-79, p p . 2-3; w. Ba rton, The Princes of India* p . 122 ; Mohd. Ishaq Khan, History of Srin agar, p . 23 .

4 3 . C iv il and M ilitary Gazette. 3ept. 5, 1378, p . l ; & .N ev e , SSZQnS. tfte.P.lr, Paa la j , p . 265 .

4 4 . ?J\T/Foreign, 3ec. E, March 18R3, N0 . 8 6 .S 5 . Ijawrence, o o .c j t , . p . 215 .46* In the words of Kgerton# Kashmir became "a vast slave-worked,

p la n t a t io n ." Report of Egerton, the B«spirty Commissioner of Kangra D i s t t . , Punjab G ovt., Records, 1863, p . 28 .

4 7 . A . Wingate# o p .c i t . . p . 17 .4 8 . Ibid.# rule 10.

90

W ingate 's re commend at ions were*, however* not accented by

the State, since these affected the interests of the ruling

bureaucracy — the Oogras and the Pandits, who possessed moat

of the cultivable lands. It seems that the Br itish itp erial

interest in Kashmir wa3 not in favour of a rad .cal change in

the agrarian system. This is the reason why W alter Lawrence

who succeeded Wingate as the Settlement Commissioner of Jammu

and Kashmir State, vehemently opoosed h is predecessors * idea

49of granting fu ll proprietary rights to the peasants. He only

favoured the grant of hereditary occuoancy rights to the cultiva­

tors which were neither alienable by sale nor by mortgage or

50otherwise. The argument which was advanced in favour o* the

ban on alienation was that i f such a right was given to the

peasants, they could easily be cheated by the corrupt o ff ic ia ls

because of th e ir ignorance* Lawrence considered the right to

se ll and mortgage land as dangerous and even disastrous for

Kashmiri Muslims as well as for the State , because according

to him# it would lead to the emergence of a large class of

powerful middlemen who could withhold the land revenue due to

the ^tate . He believed that the ignorant and inexoerienced Kashmiri

cultivators d id not understand the value of land or rights in

land; they would se ll it fo r petty amounts, and in a few years

large pron^rties would be acquired either by o ff ic ia ls or by

51in fluen cial Muslims. Lawrence based h is idea on the fear

49 . Lawrence, op .c i t . , p . 432 .5 0 . Ib id .5 1 . Ib id . , pp . 431-32,

91

that i f the Kashmiri peasants were given proprietary rights,

they would se ll it at cheap rates because of t h e ir extravagent

h a b it s . He further argued that a sim ilar reform had proved

disastrous for several Muslim Communities in India where Muslim

cultivators had sold th e ir land on a large scale to the Hindu

b a n i a s . ^

On a careful study, however, Lawrence's opposition to

W ingate 's idea seems to have been baseless . It is most lik e ly

that he succumbed to the pressure tactics of the oowerful

bureaucracy of the Dogra government. What is of s ignificance to

note is? that Wingate, while advocating grant of ownership rights

to the peasant??, had restricted the use of these rights by

Rule 3-4 and 35 which allowed cultivators to s e ll , mortgage or

transfer th e ir land only to such persons as belonged to the

cultivating class v i z . who were bonafide cu ltivato rs . According

to the Rule 35, sale, mortgage or transfer o f land to non-

53cultivators was declared null and v o id . Thus Wingate had

covered the risk of transfer of land from a g riculturist class

to non- agriculturists.

It is thus clear that during our period of study the

Kashmiri peasant d id not have any properietary rights in the

54land . Ishaq Khan also points to the same fact in h is recent

5 2 . Ib id .

53. In this case the cultivators had to get sanction from the State Government through an O fficer soectally constituted

\/ for th is purpose. A . Wingate, o p .c i t . . Rule 35.34. J-*K State Archives, Po l.D eo tt . I I . No. 35/H-64 of 1905;

Younghusband, o p .c t t . . p . 188 .

92

research work. Thus he w rites, "What the foundation of Dogra

rule brought about was the creation of a new system of agrarian

explo itation , with a p arasitical urban growth based upon i t .

The new p o lity combined p o lit ic a l authority with economic power

more fu lly than e ith er the preceding ruling classes had united

before , vesting the control over the bulk of the surplus produced

by the peasants to the land was epitomized in the derid ing remark

aa'na-hukuri meaning v illage b u l l . Though many aspects of th is

rid icule are worthy of fu ll investigation and comment such as

the context in which it f ir st appears, it can, however, be taken

as a byword of basic social relations which bound the peasant

55to the so il and m aster."

In seme of the tehails of Jammu Province, namely, 3amba

and Basoli, however, proprietary rights had been conferred on

eg _some privileged persons. Maharaja ?r_atap Sinqh passed a

XIregulation in 1894, known as 'Pratap C ode ', in favour of the

Dogra R®jouts, under which they were granted waste lands with

57fu l l rights of ownership on very moderate terms, i . e . ,

(a ) free of revenue for the f ir s t five years (b) a fter five

years, at h a lf revenue rates, and (c) total exemption from b e a a r .

5 5 . PegspectIves on Kashmir: H is t orical Qinsenslons (in print)5 6 . JScK State archives, Gen. P o l. Deptt. No. 45 of 1892 .I I . See Appendix H »5 7 . J&K State Archives, Gen. Pol. D «ptt . No. 57 of 1894 ;

%3m. Report 1892-93, p . IV; Adm. Report 1893-94, p . V I I .

93

Walter ^awrence was in favour of collecting revenue in

COca3h, but pressure was brought to bear upon him by the

o f f ic ia l and in fluen tial classes to abandon the idea of a purely

59cash assessment. This is due to the fact that the system of

collection in kind gave emoloyment to a large number of people

and also provided them with vast opportunities for perquisites

and sp eculatio n .6® Lawrence, therefore, decided to collect

revenue both in cash and k in d . He, however, believed that with

the passage c f time, monetary ^y^tem would replace the v illa g e

b arter system.

Tjawrence's wishes were fu l f il le d inl9Q3 'when thci collection

of land revenue in kind was completely abolished a n d realization

61of revenue, fu ll in cash, substituted . This act, however, did

not prove b e n e fic ia l for the cultivators because o f amnle supply

of crops at the time of harvest when people d id not easily

purchase and as a result of which cultivators had to sell th e ir

6?crops at cheat> rates . " ’loreoever, people liv in g in towns also

s u ffe re d . Previously, people l iv in g in towns were supplied grains

63at cheap rates by the Government,' but now they had to pay much

money to get grains from shopkeepers as government did not collect

the land revenue in k in d . Besides, a number of people who

r-y— ■■

5 8 .u Valley of Kash^iy. p . 4 39 . Younghusband, oo .cit .. . p . 9 1 .5 9 .uft. Lpgan, Report on the F inancial Admin1stration of Kashmir

State. 1891, p . 25 .6 0 . & . Neve, o p .c l t . . p . V I I I ; Adm. Report 1890-91, p . 4 7 .6 1 . Progs, of the Jammu and Kashmir State Council, 27th O c t .1 9 0 3 ,p . 26 2 . J&K State Archives, Pol, Deptt . No. 35 o f 19OS".6 3 . N .D . Nargis, Tarikh-l-Docra Pea, p . 6 2 7 ; N \ lA ‘o reign, P o l .,

July 1863, Nos. 73-75, pp . 5-6.

94

previously had been employed for the collection of land revenue

now became unemployed, Therefore Just a fte r one year# the State

was forced to revive the old system of collecting land revenue

64partly in cash and partly in k in d .

The management of waste lands formed an important part of

Lawrence's settlem ent, A H the waste or old fallow land which

was neither cultivated nor under the occupancy of any peasant,

gcwas declared Kh-tlsa v i z . State owned, ~ The Preferential rights

fo r acquiring such land3 were granted to the tenants of the

same v illa g e where these lands were situated , I»awrence, however,

d id not. think it necessary to demarcate grazing grounds in each

v illa g e , as mountains were the natural grazing-grounds fo r the

cattle and fo lder was abundent, The only rule observed in the

allotment of waste 1 an !3 for gracing purpose was that wa3te

land to the extent of ten per cent on the cultivated area

recorded at survey was to be le ft for v illa g e uses .

Besides land revenue, a peasant was supposed to pay several

I I Iother taxes to the 3tate O ffic ia ls which were known as Rasum,

Lawrence severely cr itic ised this ev il system, According to

him, an average v illage had to pay, besides its heavy land

revenue, a large number cf taxes for the maintenance o f State

- „ ^ - - -- - " I-T---

64V of the Jammu and Kashmir State Council, Oct, 27,1903, p . 4 ,

6 5 . valley of Kashmir* p . 4 ,66 • JFbid,, o , 4 27 . I I I . See Appendix I I I ,

57 . ^age^ e e S . oJJCa^ ^ £^ . P« 1 4 6 ., V2JlSJL-2.fKashmir, o . 402 ; Aflm. Report 1892-93, p ,1 1 7 .

95

o f f ic ia l s . Lawrence, therefore, abolished the Rasum and other

exactions and clearly- defined in h is settlement reports the

rents and l ia b i l it ie s of a cultivator . A* the same time, the

Nlzamat or the sepoys who attended at harvest to enforce the

S t a t e 's claim to a share of the produce and coerce the cultivators#

was withdrawn.

Thus the land settlement seems to have made a considerable

rove men t in the agrarian economy of the State . The holdings

of the peasants were assessed system atically and# consequently#

they knew the extent of the land revenue they had to pay.

Chances of peculation and corruption at the hands of the

revenue o ff ic ia ls were decreased, i f not completely rooted out.

The fix atio n of the State demand fo r a long time# helped the

cultivators to inprove the so il and t h i s ,i n turn ,increased

production . Grant of waste lands to the people on easy terms also

helped improve the quality of the land.

goLawrence had fixed the State demand fo r ten years. A

revision of the Land Settlement was commenced in the year 1898

and completed in 1905# the methods applied fo r the revision being

69sim ilar to those followed at the f ir s t regular settlem ent.

While the f ir s t Settlement had raised the revenue by Rs 1 85 ,1 0 3

annually, the revision raised the revenue from 1 3 .4 lakhs of

6 8 . J&K State Archives, Pol. D eptt . NO. 35 o f 1905 ;Adm. Rgpqrfc 1889-90, p . 6 1 .

6 9 . Inperial Gazetteer o f . M i a , Provincial Ser ie s , op .c l t . , p . 139.

96

rupees to 1 7 .0 0 lakhs of rupee* or by twenty-s^ven p er cent.

The incidence of revenue varied from about ten annas to twelve

rupees per acre and represented at all round rate of th irty

71p er cent of the gross produce.

Walter Lawrence was succeeded by several Settlement

Commissioners* most important of them being W .S . T a lb o t ,7 ^ and

73A , N . Stow. They worked hard to bring the land revenue system

of the State on an e f f ic ie n t fo o tin g . T h e ir e ffo rts led to a

considerable increase In the land revenue of the State .

The table given below shows an increase o f the land revenue

from the commencement of land settlement to the end o f our period

74.of study.

Land revenue collected

Y e a r (In rupees)

70

1890-91 34#69#631

1895-96 35,73,259

1900-01 38,77,960

1905-06 38,90,717

1910-11 45,40,725

1915-16 43,77,712

1920-21 40,39,367

1925-26 53, 18,843

lb . «3l<*k State ’Archives, Pol. D«ptt. No. 35 of 1905.**!• Imperial Gazetteer of India, oo .clt .. p . 139.72 . W .S. Talbot, aftfcSlfc*# pp. 1-12* M m . Report 1912.13, p .5;

1914-15, p .6 .73 . Adm. Report 1918—19. p .4 .74. ?he table has been ^ a i e d by the author after consulting the

reportss (i ) 1890-91 to 1905-06., (11)FinancialSsassfe 19Q5-06; ( H i ) fetw.Ann,■RgaadLjafc-thsfor the years S 1976 and S 1981.. (lv) Adm. Reports 1911-12 to 1925-26.

97

Grit- Intsm

It goes without saying that Wa lter Lawrence's land settlem ent

was a landmark in the agrarian history of Kashmir. Francis Young­

husband described it as "Q ie of the greatest reforms effected in

7Cthe reign of Maharaja Pratap S in g h ." In the words of ?4id Driver#

"The Settlement became a charter of liberty fo r downtrodden

Kashmiri peasant# a charter that wa3 h is due a fte r centuries of

76 77 7Pcruelty and op pressio n ." Ernest F . Neve and D .F . Knight

attributed the emergence of Kashmir from medieval conditions to

the modern era to the reforms of Lawrence. The growing prosperity

of the Kashmir cultivators was a lso ascribed to the inauguration

79of the land reforms. The State Government a lso claimed that the

Settlement "transformed the agricultural population into a self-

80reliant class , secure in its p o s it io n ." Lawrence him self w rites ,

"The State by its Justice and moderation has won the confidence

of the agricultural classes and Kashmir is now more prosperous

81and more fu lly cultivated than it has been in the memory of m an ."

It w ill be unhistorical to accept the statements referred to

above without trying to answer the following questions.

In what sense d id the Settlement make the cultivators

prosperous?

75 . Kashmir, p . 187 .76 . Rova! India , p . 256 .77 . B eyo ndthe P ir Panlal, p . 311 .'8 . Where Three Empires -Meet, p . 4 2 .*9* T r . Adm. Reports 1920-23, p . 38 .

80 • A B rief Note on Jammu and Kashmir State# 1927 , p . 3 ; A Note onJarn-mi and Kashmir State* 1928, p . 5 ; Adm. Report 1889- 90,p p .44-45.

8 1 . W i l e y of Kashmir, p . 450 .

98

How far d id the Settlement put an end to the exploitation

of the peasants by- the Jaqirdars and Chakdars?

To what extent was the Government's claim true that the

peasants were transformed into a self- reliant class?

Was the forced labour abolished?

These are the few questions which we shall try to answer

82in the following wages.

The most prominent feature of the land settlement was the

conferment of occuoancy rights on the cultivators ; the rights

83being permanent but non-alienable and hereditary , a

result ©f the settlement# a few persons were registered as

owners, while a vast number of agriculturists were recognized

as the tenants. In Kashmir Province and the Frontier D istr ic ts ;

where the State enjoyed the proprietary rights over lands, the

84following persons were recognised as the land holders*

85! • ^ssamis 2 , Chakdars 3 , Absentee landlords

8 2 . The so-called prosperity of the peasants has also been discussed in the next chapter* Money Lending System,

B3 . JStK State A-rchives, P o l.D ep tt , N0 . 35 of 1905 .8 4 , J *K State Archives, G e n .P o l .D e p tt . No. 45 ©f 189 2 .8 5 , ^ssaml means a superior tenant holding land d irectly

from the State ,

99

The State recognised a ll such persons as asaamis as were

not mere tenants but used to be landowners p r io r to appropriation

of the proprietary rights by the State , Thus a l l Jao irdars .

Chakdars and other landholders were recognised as asaam is.

They continued to enjoy the same powers and p riv ileges which

they possessed in the pre-1889 p erio d . Thus Lawrence fa ile d to

liq u id ate the feudal system which continued to ex ist t i l l 1950 .

Several types of Jaqirs existed during the period under

study. While some Jaglrs were tenable during 'the pleasure of

the ruler*, other Jaglrs were held in perpetuity . Some Jaalrs

existed on account of the service rendered by the assignees to

the State , EVery Jaa ird ar had certain v illa g es e ith er wholly or

partly assigned to him as a J a a ir . The revenue of these v illages

was collected by him . The tenants, instead of crediting the

land revenue to the State Treasury, used to pay it to the Jagirdar

or h is representative. Thus the Jaqlrdars enriched themselves at

the cost of the State .

The Ghakdars who also acquired assami rights continued to

enjoy the benefits of large chunks of land w hich 'State had

bestowed upon them.

Absentee landlords were a lso recognised as the landholders

and they got cultivated th e ir land by means o f hired labour. It

is d i f f ic u l t to assess, in the absence of any o f f ic ia l records,

how many absentee landlords existed in the State during the period

100

under study. However# by the end of °o g ra r u l e ,v i z . , 1947,

there were one and h a lf a lakh absentee 1 andlords In the State,

and they held eleven p er cent of the total cultivable area in

the S ^a te .86

In Jammu Province, where a few landlords enjoyed proprietary

87rights, the land was divided into two categories# namely*

Milklat-i-Sarkar (ownership of the Government) refers to

those landholders who enjoyed the same rights and privileges

OQwhich assamls enjoyed in Kashmir and Frontier d is t r ic t s .

Milfclat-l-Zamlndar (ownership o f landlord) refers to those

landlords who possessed prorprietary rights over t h e ir land.

They were mostly Rajputs who held these lands since the establish-

OQ

ment of the Dogra R aj. A fter the declaration of "Pratap Code"

of 1 8 9 4 ,90 which encouraged Rajputs to purchase land an nominal

91rates, and conferred proprietary rights on them, their number

Increased rap idly .

92In certain cases# several Jaalrdara or Pattadars who were

86. m.a. Beg, RgfQgaa in .qaafraix# p.52.8 7 . J&K State Archives, Gen . P o l. Deptt. No, 45 of 1892 .8 8 . Census Report of India . 1911, V o l . XX# Part I# p . 8 .8 9 . J&K State Archives, Gen . Pol. Deptt. Mo. 45 of 1892 .9 0 . Adrn. Report 1893;*’? . V I I .9 1 . J&K State Archives, Gen . Po l. Deptt. No. 67 of 1894.9 2 . Patt&dftc means the person who were granted land on ?atta i .e .

a written grant, by the State Government. The Committee for Jaqlra and ^ a f i s , appointed by the State in 1929, c la ss ifie d Jaqjrdars as the persons enjoying Jaolrs of r*s. 3000 or above per annum, and those enjoying below >? 3000 per annum were called Pattadars.

101

merely assignees of land revenue and had no proprietary rights,

used to recover revenue in k ind , not under any provisions o f the

tenancy law but as a result of some special p riv ilege that was

granted to them by the State . In cases, however, where the term

of settlement had expired and revisions of assessment had not

taken place, payment in k in d was substituted by payment in cash .

It was, however, ordered that in cases where conversion of kind

into cash payment, was enforced, the Jaalrdar would be compensated

fo r the loss sustained by him by an additional grant o* Jaalr

land of the value equivalent in revenue to the assigned revenue

93of h is existing Jagli?. In addition to these privilecres, the

Jaqjrdar3 were also given the right to recover all arrears of

Ja o lr money from the peasants as arrears of land revenue. Thus

the Jacrlrdars exacted as much amount as they wanted.

94The tenants were c la ss ifie d in the State ass

1 . r ustaall Kashtkar

2 . ^enants-at-will

3 . sub-tenants.

"iistagll Kashtkar# permanent cultivator, held land in

occuoancy t it le from the Assargis. A guarantee was given to them

that only fo r special reasons they could be evicted . The payment

9 3 . It should be borne in mind that these extra Jaglrs were to be given in Jammu to Ja g ir holders from Kashmir and in

/K ash m ir to those from Jammu. It further made J^alrdars / dependent upon State and therefore more loyal to the Maharaja.

9 4 . J&K state Archives, Gen. P o l. Deptt. No . 45 of 1892 .

102

of rent by the tenants to the landowners was made compulsory

95according to custom,

Tenants-at-will cultivated the land o f the landholders, or

96that of State , and enjoyed no rights of occupancy. They could

be evicted by landholder or the State by an ordinary notice at any

97tim e.

Sub-tenants were the landless labourers who cultivated any

land on meagre wages. ^e do not know how many landless labourers

existed during the period under study? but by the end or n ">gra

rule v i z . 1947, thr>ir number had reached three lakhs, and they

cultivated about ten per cent of the total cultivated area in the

State ,

Thus the major portion of the cultivatP^ble land in the State

s t i l l continued to be in possession of a few landlords, and

m ajority of the cultivators who contributed most of the to il and

sweat in producing crops, had no rights over th e ir land. The

State Government made several legislations to safeguard the

interests of the landlords. Practically the tenant was le ft at the

mercy of the land-owning class and the law barely helped him.

The State Government cared more to protect the interests of the

land owners and almost neglected the interests of the tenants .

--- ..................................... ... — . ..

9 5 , Agricultural Reforms in Kashmir, p , 3 2 ,9 6 . Census .Report of IndjaJ 1911, p . 8 ,

9 7 , agr taultt&*ra|lfflcaft ,j a . KashtffiU, t>.32.9 8 . Ib id . , p . 5 2 .

\ 9 9 . J&K State Archives, P o l , Deptt., No, 64/V-20 of 1923, al6o. J&K State Archives, Pol, Deptt . No, 2 2 4 /2 /8 8 of 1912 .

103

I f the Dogra rulers had allowed the ordinary Law of

Inheritance to operate, it is most likely that the Jaalrs and

*tiaf la would have lost a ll th e ir v it a lit y owing to the process

of fragm entation. To keep a liv e feudal trad itio n s , the Law of

Primogeniture was, therefore, made applicable to all the

assignm ents. According to th is Law, the J a a lr or Muaf 1 on the

death of an assignee, descended upon h is eldest son and in the

event of there being no such son, upon the senior member of the

senior branch of the family of the original g r a n t e e . I n th is

way, Jaa lrd a ri system in the State was not only saved but further

strengthened. The landowning class used two weapons to exploit

the peasantry v i z . , unlawful evictions , and the enhancement of

rent at w i l l . It was not d i f f ic u l t fo r landlords to evict the

cultivator from th eir land. They hardly issued any receipt of the

revenue to the peasants. Whenever they desired a replacement bv

new cultivator , in order to receive more revenue from the new one,

they issued a simple notice through the Revenue O fficer . Though

the cultivator could challenge the landlord in a court of law,

he was, however, denied this opportunity since th^iotice was

served to him only at the time of ev ictio n . In several other cases,

the landowners in collusion with petty o fficers o f the Revenue

102Department used to get such lands entered as under Khudkasht

as were actually t il le d by the tenants. Thus, the cu ltivato r was

deprived of h is land and the owner o f the land used to enjoy the

fr u it of h is labour.

1 01 . J&K State Archives, Po l. Deptt . No. 117/H-57 of 1909 .102 . means self- cultivation .

104

Another source of trouble to the peasantry was the

enhancement of rent by landlords a fte r short span of periods*

There were fou r kinds of rents charged from the peasantry*

N a a a d i .103 Ratal104 Zabtl105 and Chakota. 106 The landowner

had several means to raise the rents* I f a cultivator used to

produce more crops, the share of produce ( B atal) o f landowner

a lso increased automatically in proportion. Every tenant used

to give share of cattle fodder to the landowner as a matter of

right* In addition to that, the owner had the right to free

service from the cultivator . It is safe to conclude on the

basis of the availab le data that the landowners used to realise

e ith e r or 2 /3 of the produce in kind as rent from t h e ir

107tenants and at some places the rent recovered was h ig her .

The Land Settlement, at the same time, did not a ffe c t the

powers and priv ileges enjoyed by and Mjgqaaairefts

Khwars. and they continued to explo it the peasantry even with

more vigour than b efo re . The ifriafidars more or less enjoyed

the same p riv ileg es as the Jaalrdars d id . They were quite a lot

in number and they had b ig chunks of land allotted to him. They

used to derive a ll benefits from the produce of th e ir assigned

108lands and yet paid no land revenue. On paper these Nfaaf is

were generally conferred on temples, mosques a n d 're lig io u s

103 . Naaadi was cash rent paid cm land irrespective of the crop

grown upon i t .1 0 4 . Batal was a d e fin ite share of the crop.1 0 5 . Zabtl was cash rent for particular crops which ctould not

conveniently be divided , at fixed rates p e r kanal o r blah a .1 0 6 . Chakota was lurtp grain rent consisting of a fixed amount of

grain in the spring, and a fixed amount of money in the autumn harvest.

107 . Agyiaqitqriii Rgfoxm la &tahmLc# pp* 32-33 .10®^ I t is worthy of note that not only these ^tiafidars d id not

u pay revenue on these free-holds but they also possessed

lands in ownership also , fo r which they paid no land revenue.

105

institutions but the b en efit went to those who managed them.

Thus the poor masses were exploited in the name of r e lig io n .

109Pharmarth was the biggest religious muaf 1 in the State ,

as discussed above. The income o f Pharma rth was derived from

the old endowments and the large cash contributions made from

110time to time by the State . However, the main assets of t h e ir

fund were made up of revenues of twenty f iv e v illa g es in the

Kashmir v illages and th irty fiv e in the Jammu Pro v in ce .* * * Added

to th is , some income was received from the offerings o f the

temples and the interests of the surplus money invested in

112promissory notes or lent cm loans to the S ta te . The Pharmarth

fund was exclusively administered by or under the orders o f the

Maharaja. The accounts of Pharmarth fund were kept separate from

the p ub lic accounts and were under sole management of the

113Pharmarth O fficers and the Pharmarth treasurers. As early as

1890 , the total capital o f the Pharmarth fund even exceeded one

114h a lf of the total annual income to the State from all resources.

115It also continued to be the b iggest money lending institution

in the State throughout the period under study.

Hicraarraree-Khwars were another section of p r ivilege-holders

which was a heavy burden on the State exchequer. These Maqqarraree-

1 0 9 . J&K State Archives, H .H . Govt. Rec. No. 18 o f 1890 .110k v J&K State Archives, Po l. P ep tt . No. 5 9 /F —10 of 1900 .

I l l * J&K State Archives, H .H .G o v t . Rec. No. 18 o f 1890 .1 1 2 . J&K State Archives, P o l .P ep tt . N o .2 8 4 /1 0 o f 1916 .1 1 3 . R. t*ogan, o p .c i t . . p . 61*1 14 . ^ “he total capital of the Pharmarth In stitu tio n in 1890-91 was

" 27v24 lakhs of rupees, while the annual income of the StateIjjeturing the same year was 4 8 .4 5 lakhs of rupees.

115 | C .R . K iem an d er . Report on Pharmarth Fund, J&K State (1896- 97),,

p p . 1 ,8 and 14 .

106

Khwars were the receipt lent a of cash grants from the State

Treasury, and which were drawn by them In s ix monthly instalm ents.

The ^icrqarrareea d id nothing and were a dead weight on the

resources of the State, generation a fter g e n e r a t io n ,116

There is a strong evidence to show that the middlemen

continual to indulge in corrupt practices in colloboration w ith

117the revenue o f f ic ia ls , % particular , the collection of raaum

liftcontinued to be the rule rather than an exception ,

J u r is d ic t lo n a lJ a q lr s

The agrarian reforms of Pratap S in g h 's reign did not,

however, a ffe c t the l ife and condition of the people l iv in g in

the Jurisd ictio nal Jacrlrs. They continued to live under the

tyrannical rule of th e ir rulers and their contlltion, in certain

119cases, was even worse than other people of the State .

Poonch Illaq a , as discussed in previous Chapter, was the

b iggest Jurisdictional Jactir in the State, which contained more

than l /1 0 t h of the total population of the State , with 2% total

120area of the State . The powers of Raja of Punch, at least in

theory, were rather restricted . He asserted a loose sort of

dominion over the lands. He could not interfere with the management

of lands held in J a a lr by him . H is rights were governed by the

116W %grtealt^ral An PP. 15-17.117V J&K State Archives, S t . Deptt, No, 38 /B - II o f 1908 , l ia ^ T'or example, in Yasin , Kuh and Gqais, Lam bdM ara and Qiaufriaara

were allowed rasum. F .M . Hasaain, a L J n O l a , p p . 115-16.

1 1 9 . Sardar Budh Singh, J&qjr Sh^hlr,Ka,Postmgrteqy p . 27 .1 2 0 . Cfiasg^ of ^Qd.^a, 1911. V o l . XX, Part I I j S ta t is t ic a l Atiaa of

-gfeftlE by D ,n . Nagarlcatti, 1927, p . 7 the population o f Poonch Illaqa in 1921 was 351781 against 3320518 of J&K State .

107

121 the.stip u latio n s embodied in the Sanads. But p r a c t ic a lly < Raja

enjoyed unlim ited powers and people suffered under him a ll these

122years. It is no surprise, therefore, that the people liv in g

in h is Ja a lr were greatly ag itated . The peasants of Bagh and

Sudhvoti Tehslla and p articularly the peasants belonging to the

Sudhan trib e were ch iefly d is s a t is f ie d . They raised t h e ir voice

against oppression time and again but to no a v a il . Though

settlement was made in the J a a lr in 1906, i t d id not grant

123ownership right to the cultivators . But the cultivators of

Thaklala-Parawa in Tehs 11 Mendhar who were mostly Dogra Rajputs,

were granted these rights In lands held by them. This discriminatory

treatment stirred b it te r feelings of discontent and d issa t isfa c tio n

1 2 Aamongst the peasants of other parts of the J a a l r .

Another such J a a lr was that o f Chenanl, Here again the Raja

was too powerful because he him self was "the ruler, the Magistrate,

1 2*5the police o ff ic e r and the controller of su p o lies . The 'R a ja '

continued the process of exploitation throughout the period . The

State began the work of Land Settlement In h is J a a ir in 1912.

But the Settlement work made very slow progress because the Raja

had unjustly appropriated the lands of the people, encroached upon

the 'w astelands ' and grazing pastures, extended h is hunting

preserves, transferred Ja a lr lands to h is w ife and son and acquired

c u lt iv a to rs ' lands fo r him self by coercion and at nominal p r i c e ,127

1 21 , J&K State Archives, po l . Deptt. No. 139/N-316 of 1907 ,

1 22 , J&K State Archives, P i l .D e p t t . No. 135/H-16 of 1910 ,123 , Sardar Budh s i-ngh, o p .c it .* p p . 27-30.124 , Mirza A fza i Beg, o o .c lt . . p . 24 ,125 , Ib id .1 26 , M m . Report 1912-13, p . 7 ,127 , Rgport_of the Revenue Commissioner, cited in Agricultural

Reforms in Kashmir, p p . 20-21.

108

Ssgac:

Reqar or the system of forced labour remained one of the

most pronounced features o f the Kashmir adm inistration under

Pratap Singh , The sufferings of the v illagers o f Kashmir were

much greater in the late 19th century, mainly due to the

construction of Jehlum V aiiey road and the G i ig it Road, Thousands

of them were forced to work for the successful completion of

these roads since th e ir construction was considered to be of v it a l

128importance fo r the interests of B ritish Im perialism , The

labourers had to c a r r y from s r inagar the food and other supplies

to the State garrisons posted at G iig it and beyond. The condition

of beqar labourers was very apethetic especially during w inter

months owing to heavy snowfall* No arrangements were made fo r the

feeding or housing of the coolies in the course of t h e ir journey;

with the result many of them died on the way owing to exposure

and d ise a se . The S^inagar- Gilgit track was rightly described as

'the S iberia of Kashmir• / ''"T h e conditions of the Kashmiri

v illa g e r s worsened during the Frontier wars when a large number

of them were seized for beoar ao as to serve the British interests*

It is d i f f ic u l t to say how many of the v illagers died of cold

and d isea se ; how many died o f starvation ; how many fe ll into the

1 28 . Walter Lawrence says, MOiee when I was going up the Sind ValleyI came across some soldiers raising carriage fo r G i i g i t . The Havildar admitted that he had torn the whole o f the whisker off one man's face, and said he had done it under instructions from a Pandit deputed from the Tehs 1,1. He added that the people were so d is in clin ed to go away for two months to G i ig it , that it was necessary to tear t h e ir h a ir out. He sav nothing to be ashamed of, and challenged my right to interfere.** Lawrence

to Nisbet, Nov. 13, 1889, N A I/F o re ig n . Sec .E , Feb. 1891,Progs., Nos. 295-326*

129 . E .F . Knight, Where ThflBft .Er e U M „ „ P* 303*Gazetteer of In d ia . 1908. p . 7 8 .

109

river or were beaten to death by the Dogra sold iers ; or how

many were sold as slaves in Dardistan or other parts of C®ntral

A s ia . But th e ir number must have been very large because there

is both documentary and circum stantial evidence to support our

contention. To be pressed into services on the G ilg it road,

according to one observer, was the equivalent of being sent to

a Siberian Salt M ine .3,30 'Men and Miles died lik e f l i e s ' cm

111t h e ir way to G i l g it . The burden fe ll only on the Muslim

v illa g ers of Kashmir, as the c ity people and Pandits were

132exenpted from begar .

Although Walter Lawrence was c r it ic a l o f b e g a n he was

convinced that its total abolition would b rin g about the collapse

133of the transport system of the v a lle y . ®fe, therefore,

recommended the abolition of begar in its most objectionable

134form. It was due to Lawrence's effo rts that the State Council

framed the rules fo r controlling the labour required fo r carriage

135of essential commodities by the labourers. In a resolution

passed on I s? A pril, 1892, it was laid down that no one would be

engaged as Coolie unless he :

a) had obtained the age of 18 years;

b ) was physically strong and f i t for d u tie s ;

1 30 . JOhn K«ay, The Gjlqat game, p . 217 .

131 . Ib id .

1 3 2 * ^m in istrat^raH of*K ashm ir1 State. L? 8 9 l ' g re a te r ^e ta lsee M. Ishaq Khan# Some Aspects of Corvee in Kashmir, Researdij Jouimal, V o l . I , N o .I I , 1976, p p .58-71*

p *4J3x Ssafrffinggia Qf c.°c w ,..liu |fo&taLc^134 . J&K State Archives, P o l .D eo tt . No. 35 o f 190S? M m .Report 1

1889-90, p . 6 1 . In 1889, at the height of a cholera epidemic, eight or ten thousand coolies were sent oBf hastily to G iig it| and thousands of others had to pay heavy bribes to escape imprisonment. The mortality along the road from Cholera among the ill- fed. ill-clad coolies , w The Tourist^s Guide to Kashmir*

135 . j s r s t a t r t r a i s s s136 . 9nder-Special cases, a

per month. Ib jd .c o o l ie 's pay could be enhanced to te 4 /

110

c) entered the service w illingly?

d) provided a good conduct certific a te from the T ehsildar of the d is t r ic t .

It was also laid down in th is resolution that an additional

Cess of one Anna in Jammu and h a lf an Anna in Kashmir fo r each

rut>ee of land revenue paid by the cultivator be levied to meet

the cost of the transport Department and a force of one thousand

labourers and 200 pack ponies to be permanently employed. A coolie

136was to be paid 5/~ per month. The dut ies of Coolie would

consist of:

a) a regular attendance;

b ) punctual and safe transmission and delivery ofloads to and fro at a stage ;

c) collection of fuel and grass when not employed in transport work;

d) repairing roads when required to do so;

e) conveyance of Shall from place to place when necessary and a ll other works required of him by the Governors under the guidance of General Member.

Although the St^te C o u n c il 's leg islatio n and the completion

of the Jehlum Valley and the G i ig it roads provided some r e lie f

to the peasants, the system of beaar continued to ex ist u n t il

1 371923 when it was o f f ic ia l ly abolished . But what is o f interest

to note is that henceforth beaar took the form of Karwj-Sarkar

Under th is system# the v illagers were required to render services

136 . Under Special Cases, a c o o lie 's pay could be enhanced

to Ps 6/- per month. Ib id .137 . J&K State Archives, ? C C P v t .R e c . No. 32 of 1923 .

I l l

to the State whenever demanded. No wonder the o f f ic ia ls of

the State exnloited the institution fo r t h e ir private purposes.

They- used to "ertploy villagers to carry t h e ir luggage free of

charge over long distances and intend on the v illagers for

138services without any re num eration." Even the menial s ta ff

in the government offices was exploited by t h e ir superiors in

1 39the name of Kar-i-3arkar. T h e severity of the labour

requisitioned for the State purposes was no less than that of

the forced labour,and the condition of pesantry under the

Kar-i-Sarkar grew from bad to worse than i t was under the b eaa rM ^

It is not therefore surprising that the Chaitedars continued to

employ forced labour for the purposes of cultivation until the

early th irties when the peasantry, under the leadership of

Sheikh Mohammad Abdullah, raised a banner of revolt against the

feudal regim e.1* 1

13®. Report of the Glancy Commission, 12 Nov. 1931 .139 . G . Hasan Khan, o p .c it . . p . 118. Also see Rashid T a s ir

140 . The Ranbir, Jammu 9 Har 3 . 1983.141 . It is beyond the scooe of the present research work to dwell

at length on the great uprising of July 1931 . The interpre­tation offered above, however, finds ful l support in Ishaq

Khan, PSESJBeqfclVBff H,la&agjgajJ^nffllStana (in print)