asked for or received any pattás or titles to their holding, that no period of time could bar the Zamíndár's claim to rent. As he was bound to pay the revenue, a demand for rent to pay it constituted a cause of action, and no amount of time in which payment had not been demanded, or had been withheld, could create a title to sit rent-free. In theory it was asserted that most Ryots could not sell or transfer their holdings without the consent of the superior landlord.
But in treating of the Ryot's position it will be shown that in this respect practice was at variance with theory. Over jungle, waste, scrub and swamp, the Zamíndár had equally clear rights. They were termed Bankar, or forest produce: Jalkar, fishery: Phulkar, honey and fruits: and Thalkar, what dropped on the ground. When the Zamíndár was minded to expend money on his Zamíndárí, his expenditure generally took the following shape. He might drain a huge swamp by cutting a channel for the overflow of its water into the nearest river. He excavated by paid labour an enormous reservoir which secured a supply of pure water for half-a-dozen villages. He constructed gháts or landing-places of stone or brick on the banks of rivers or tanks. He dedicated temples and built school-houses. But he never controlled the agricultural operations of his tenants, or thought himself bound to provide them with houses or to fence their land.
It is clear that Cornwallis did not fully compre-
