Page:Indian Journal of Economics Volume 2.djvu/326

PA OA I? The later. diplomatic achievements of. the company and its feats of arms against the are well-known. In spite of this that India under the Oompsuy, and subjected ?o the control of the Governor-General at Calcutta, and a Cour? of directors in London, was not really consolidated and unified. of Bengal, Bombay, and Madras unorganized natives it muet be admitted though cenlralized The Presidencies published separate accounts and the taxation of this period was anything but uuiform all over the ?3ompany's dominions. Until was both the lost in trade was and year all its trader made also the and the up from from the company's 188? the Company ruler. Whatever it the tudian territorial revenues, iraffic wiih Ohiua. In ihai monopoly of Ohiua grade and other trading The Company, functions were abolished by Parliament. however, continued to pay its regular dividends in London amounting to over ?g600,000 ? until after the rebellion of 1857 when its total stoc!? and other obliga- tions were conver?ed into the Indian public debt. The company very naturally continued the tax system handed down to it by its predecessors. Land still formed the bulk of the revenue; even a? 1853 this source' coutributed more than revenue as la?e half of the total gross receipts. * Indirect taxation such as sal?, opium, customs, transit duties, stamgs, registra- tion, excise on spirituous liquors, and tobacco eonffibuted not less than one-third, if not more. Thus the Com- pauy's Government always tried to keep au impartial equilibrium between direct and indirect taxation. The laud revenue iu Bengal was settled once for all in 1798 and the Cour? of Directors in approving this limitation on the Government demands from land declared that t "the true policy requires us to hold this I Esst Indis Aooounts and Pspers, 1866.56. 2 Esst Indis Aooouuts emd Pspers, 18?2-?S. The gross reooipts were S8,$10,000, snd out of this tS,?J6fLOO0 were from lsnd revenue,