PEASANTS AND BRITISH RULE IN ORISSA 29
ched at Rs. 13,14,825.2 In 1805, the Government fixed its demand on ten zamindaries in perpetuity. Subsequently, five more estates were brought under permanent settlement.3 Khordha, a large zamindari, was made a government estate after the rebellion of its king in 1805. Thus, the great bulk of the area in the three districts was under temporary zamindari settlement. The settlement of 1804-05 was followed by a series of short settlements, valid for only one to three years at a stretch. The land revenue demand was steadily raised. In 1818-19 the demand was Rs. 16,37,924; an increase of at least 50 per cent over the Maratha demand was brought about in the course of only 15 years. By that time, the land revenue demand on the three districts was 'assessed equally highly with some and more highly than other districts in Bengal and Behar of acknowledged value, richness and fertility'.4
The increases in the revenue demand were brought about without any reference to the condition of the people, the productive ability of land etc. and were not based on any detailed assessment of total rent or changes therein. The assessments were essentially guided by the motive of maximising the revenue from land without any consideration of the ability of the assessees to meet the demand.5
In addition to its heaviness, the British demand was inflexible in both amount and timing of collection, unlike the Maratha demand. The latter had always granted remissions of revenue during years of crop failure. The three coastal districts were typically subject to floods, inundations as well as drought. Since 1804 there were many instances of heavy loss of crop either due to excessive rainfall or lack of it. But no remission of revenue was ever granted. Furthermore, failure to pay revenue led to the sale of the estates. For instance, there was severe drought in 1806-07 and 266 estates were sold for their inability to meet the revenue demand.6
The severity of the British land revenue demand can be gauged from the fact that during the period of short revenue settlements, every increase in government demand was accompanied by a fall in the collections, and a large number of estates were sold to recover the uncollected amount. Moreover, many estates came to be held khas by the government, following the refusal of their proprietors to engage for the assessed revenue. The proportion of the average annual demand collected during the currency of the settlement declined from 94 per cent to 27 per cent between 1805-06 and 1818-19. During the same period, 1,129 estates paying total revenue of Rs. 9,65,984 were sold for arrears of revenue. In spite of this, the outstanding arrears of current revenue amounted to Rs. 12,22,748 in 1817-18, or about three-fourths of the revenue demand.7
As a consequence of the British land revenue policy, a very large section (52 per cent) of those who were declared proprietors in 1804-05 were dispossessed during the following fifteen years. In 1918 the