mote districts of that country, we shall find a very different rate of wages from that given by Mr. Martin, the difference between them and the vicinity of Calcutta being greater than between the richest part of England and the poorest part of Ireland.

The number of persons throughout INDIA, who can earn even £4 per annum, must be very small indeed. The districts above referred to are those that have enjoyed the greatest tranquillity; in which person and property have been most secure; in which capital has most accumulated, and which enjoy the greatest advantages of situation, from the facility with which they can transport their products to Calcutta. If, with all these advantages, wages are only £3 per month; if, even in the capital, a mechanic can earn only £5 4s., what must be the wages of those who occupy districts more reinote, in which person and property have continued insecure; in which capital has not accumulated, and which possess no means of transport for their productions?

In that of Kemaoon, north of Oude, with fertile valleys which yield largely in return to labour, and with mountains filled with mineral wealth, the labour of extracting and smelting ores is performed by slaves, who "are ground down to such a degree that, if their squalid looks did not bear testimony to the truth of their complaints," they could not have been believed. At the mines of Gungowly and Buelice, children, "nearly all of whom are frightfully deformed," are employed in "digging out the ores," their only reward for which is "a small quantity of earth and stones containing particles of copper ore, from which, with much additional labour, they extract about eight anas (half a rupee, equal to 25 cents,) worth of copper per month." Here we have abundant evidence of the universal truth that, when the superior soils only are cultivated, man is poor and wretched. This province abounds in the materials for the production of wealth; with fertile land; with ores of copper and of iron; with forests for the supply of fuel; yet its inhabitants are miserably poor, and the revenue yielded to the government "is scarcely sufficient to support its own establishments."

In forming an estimate of the return to labour throughout a country of such immense extent, it is necessary to take the most remote as well those most near to the centre of commerce and civilization. It is also necessary to take into consideration the extreme unsteadiness of employment; the vast number of wanderers seeking the means of subsistence; the number of those who pre

* M'Culloch's Geology of Kemaoon, quoted in Literary Gazette, 1837, p. 56.

fer, or are compelled, to seek support by preying upon others; the armies employed in maintaining order, &c., constituting a most important portion of the population.

If we divide that of British India into families of four, we shall have 34 millions, each giving one able-bodied labourer. Of these, vast numbers are unemployed, or their labour is unproductive; but, on the other hand, their wives and children are, in many cases, productively employed, and tend to make amends for the mis-direction of the labours of the men; and we may, therefore, estimate that the number of persons earning wages is equal to 34 millions of labourers. Their average earnings throughout the empire cannot be estimated higher than 24 rupees, (£2 10s. or $12,) per annum, equal to 85 millions of pounds sterling, and leaving above 100 millions, or more than one half of the total product, to be divided among the owners of capital in its various forms of agricultural implements, seed, manufacturing machinery, and land. That this allowance for the capitalists is not excessive, the reader will be satisfied from the following facts.

The profit of a loom is stated by Dr. Hamiltont at 13d. per week, equal to £2 16s. 6d. per annum, while the wages of the weaver are 4s. 6d. per month, or £2 14s. per annum. At Patna, the profit of a loom employed in making checkered muslins, and employing three persons, is stated at £10 16s. per annum, or 1s. 4d. per week, for each person, while the earnings of the weaver are from 1s. to ls. 4d. The poverty of the owners of the looms is such, that they are compelled to obtain advances of capital from their employers, who, in their turn, claim a large proportion of the product as interest for advances thus made. Under these circumstances, we think it doubtful if the labourer obtains even one third of the market value of the commodity he produces. His situation is similar to that of the savage, who, in exchange for a common knife, gives a skin that will sell for one, two, or three, guineas.

Had we taken the estimate of Mr. Martin, or that of Mr. M'Queen, (£541,250,000-Statistics of the British Empire, p. 185,) of the product of India, the proportion of the capitalist would have been vastly greater. No estimate of the wages of India can materially exceed 90 millions, which would leave, were we to adopt the estimate of the first, five sevenths of the whole, or 223 millions, for the capitalists, or, according to that of the latter, five sixths.

+ Quoted by Baines, p. 72.

"Such is the poverty of the workmen, and even of the manufacturers them. selves, that the resident has to advance beforehand the funds necessary, in order to produce the goods. The consequence of this system is, that the manufacturers, and their men, are in a state of dependence, almost amounting to servitude. The resident obtains his labour at his own price.”—Baines, p. 73.

VOL. II.-37.

In agriculture we find a similar system. The proprietor advances seed, which is " repaid to him, with 100 per cent., by way of interest."* We have already shown, that the established assessment for the rent of land is one half of the gross produce, leaving for the cultivator the balance, subject to all the demands that "avarice and ambition, pride, vanity, or intemperance" may lead the Zemindar to make. Col. Sykes has published† tables of the produce of the rent or land tax in the Deccan, in which he shows that, taking the price of grain as we have done, at one rupee per maund, the proportion of the landlord is only one fifth. He is, no doubt, correct, but it proves only extreme irregularity in the amount of contributions, always the characteristic of such a state of society. Mr. Rickards has, on the contrary, given numerous statements, showing that the rent was much more than one half of the gross produce. Supposing Col. Sykes's views to be correct, the only effect is to diminish the share of the land-owner, and not to increase the quantity remaining for the cultivator.

If the latter, retaining four fifths of the products, obtain only 6s. per head, per month, or £3 12s. per annum, at which rate wages are estimated by Col. Sykes,§ it follows that the whole product can be only £4 10s. per annum, which is far less than our estimate, although that is so far below those of several other writers.

In Calcutta, the rate of interest, or proportion taken by the bank, is 7 per cent., but 10 per cent. is commonly charged for the use of capital. If such is the case in large loans among merchants, we can readily see that the proportion taken for the use of smaller quantities, in the form of houses, machinery, &c., must be immensely great. Capital is scarce, the quantity to be loaned by individuals is small, and the share demanded is great; those who desire to have it are entirely destitute, and they are willing to give a large proportion of the product of their labour to secure its aid. We feel, therefore, satisfied that if we estimate the total product at 200,000,000 pounds, that portion which goes to the labourers does not exceed 90,000,000.||

See page 129, ante.

* Colebrooke's Husbandry of Bengal ; quoted by Rickards, Vol. I. p. 568. + Proceedings of the Statistical Society of London, Vol. I. p. 97. Page 280, ante. In a work by Mr. M'Queen, recently published-General Statistics of the British Empire, London, 1837-there are estimates of the product of Great Britain, essentially different from those we have submitted to the reader. We deem it necessary only to remark that wages are estimated throughout Great Britain and Ireland, at the rate of England, and thus the unfortunate native of Ireland, who is stated to obtain only 6d. per day for a portion of the year, is made to rank with the

native of England, who has constant employment, with treble reward. The whole calculation of Mr. M'Queen is of the most exaggerated kind, as the reader may imagine from an examination of a portion of that which relates to India, and which we now submit to him. He says

"It is considered in theory that the cultivator pays half the produce to the landholder, out of which half ten elevenths, or nine tenths, constitute the revenue paid to government, and one tenth, or one eleventh, the net rent of the landholder.' Now, as the whole sum received by the government for this land tax is, say, in round numbers, 14,000,000l., it follows that the whole gross agricultural produce of India is only 30,800,000l. per annum, a sum as miserable as it is quite ridiculous. The Hindoos live on little; but it is quite impossible that they could subsist on this. Accordingly, some of the evidence tells us that the tax is evaded to the extent, in some places, of from 100 to 400 per cent.: still, even with this augmentation, the value of the land in India is at a very low rate. According to Mr. Sullivan and Mr. Mill, land sells at from 25 to 100 years' purchase, according to the rent. Of the state of the cultivators of the soil in India, Mr. Sullivan and Rammohun Roy give a deplorable picture. Their wages, says Mr. Sullivan, (p. 491,) are 38. per month, and their house in much the same state now that they have been from a remote antiquity-the walls are built of mud, and thatched with grass,'-in some places tiles had lately been substituted for thatch; and in lawns the houses are almost invariably tiled.' Rammohun Roy states (p. 740): 'In Calcutta, artisans, such as blacksmiths and carpenters, if good workmen, get (if my memory be correct,) from 10 to 12 rupees a month, (that is, about 20s. to 248.;) common workmen, who do inferior plain work, 5 or 6 rupees, (that is, about 10s. to 128. sterling money;) masons from 5 to 7 (10s. to 14s.) a month; common labourers about 3, and some 4 rupees; gardeners, or cultivators of land, about 4 rupees a month; and palanquin-bearers the same. In small towns the rates are something below this; in the country places still lower. In Bengal, they live most commonly on rice, with a few vegetables, salt, and hot spices, and fish; I have, however, often observed the poorer classes living on rice and salt only. In the Upper Provinces they use wheaten flour instead of rice, and the poorer classes frequently use bajara, &c., (millet, &c.) The Mahomedans, in all parts, who can afford it, add fowl and other animal food. A full grown person, in Bengal, consumes, I think, from about 1 lb. to 1 lb. of rice a day; in the Upper Provinces, a larger quantity of wheaten flour, even though so much more nourishing. [The vaishya (persons of the third class), and the Brahmans of the Deccan, never eat flesh under any circumstances.] In higher Bengal, and the Upper and Western Provinces, they occupy mud huts; in the lower parts of Bengal, generally hovels composed of straw, and mats, and sticks, the higher classes only having houses built of brick and lime. The Hindoos of the Upper Provinces wear a turban on the head, a piece of cotton cloth, (called a chadad,) wrapped round the chest, and another piece girt closely about the loins, and falling down towards the knee; besides, they have frequently under the chadad a vest, or waistcoat, cut and fitted to the person. In the Lower Provinces they generally go bare-headed; the lower garment is worn more open, but falling down towards the ankle; and the poorer class of labourers have merely a small strip of cloth girt round their loins for the sake of decency, and are in other respects quite naked. The Mahomedans every where use the turban, and are better clad. The respectable and wealthy classes of people, both Mussulmans and Hindoos, are, of course, dressed in a more respectable and becoming manner.' "At the above rate, to feed and clothe the population of London and its vicinity, costs more, and is of more value to the agricultural, commercial, and manufacturing interests of this country than almost half Hindostan.

"In order to fix a reasonable [!] value on the property and amount of the produce of the land in India, let us take the following data. The government proportion

of the produce is variously stated, from late authorities, to run from one fifth, one tenth, to one fifteenth, and by some, confidently, to not more than one twenty-sixth part. Let us take one twentieth [!] as the true portion, being a medium between the two latter statements, and then we have 280,000,000l. as the produce of the land in India; and by the scale of the value of land in Great Britain, to the produce thereof, we have the value of the land in India, 1,364,000,000l. By the same scale we would bring out the value of live stock, and all farming stock to be 388,000,000%; the value of houses, 356,000,000l.; the annual value of manufactures, 153,000,000l.; and so of every thing else. Still these sums, though nearer the truth, are evidently too low, as the produce of agriculture and manufactures added together would only allow of about 4l. 14s. for the yearly consumption of each native in British India, for food, clothing, and tares. If we therefore add one fourth to this, it will bring it to 6l. sterling per annum for each; and, consequently, one fourth, to each of the above sums, will give us the value of all property in British India.” -Statistics of British Empire, p. 183.

The above statement of wages accords fully with those we have submitted to the reader; showing that the gardener or cultivator obtains, in Calcutta, four rupees per month-"in small towns something below this; in the country places still lower."

After quoting the testimony of Rammohun Roy, "that it is considered, in theory that the cultivator pays half of the produce to the landholder," of which “nine tenths constitute the revenue to government;" after informing us that the gov ernment portion of the produce has been stated by the latest authorities to run from one fifth to one tenth, one fifteenth, and one twenty-sixth part, Mr. M'Queen takes one twentieth as the true portion, thus reducing the landlord's share to five per cent., instead of fifty, as stated by Rammohun Roy. Even with this he can make only £ 4 14s. per head, and he therefore most generously adds at once above twentyfive per cent., [thus reducing the government share to four per cent.,] in order to secure to each person £6 per head. It would have cost no more trouble to allow to each £ 10 or £20 per head, and this increased sum would be quite as certain to reach the pocket of the labourer, as would be the £6 already awarded to him. Mr. Sullivan states the wages of a labourer at 3s. per month, or 36s. per year, equal to about 98. per head of the population, while Mr. M'Queen awards 120s. per head, being thirteen times as much as is stated by the witness whom he summonses.

We have estimated the total produce of that country at thirteen hundred and forty millions of rupees, or six hundred and seventy millions of dollars. (See page 281, ante.) Mr. M'Queen estimates it at five hundred and forty-one millions two hundred and fifty thousand pounds sterling, or fifty-four hundred millions of rupees. The reader will examine for himself which estimate is most deserving of confidence. What renders it still more extraordinary that he should have made such an estimate is that only four pages after the above extract, he gives the following passage from the Parliamentary Report of 1831.

66

Peter Gordon, Esq., in his evidence, states (p. 30,) that one fourth of the produce on dry lands, and one half the produce on wet lands, or lands which command water, is taken by the government in the legal assessment, and that a much higher proportion than that is extorted, and this by the application of torture. Three fifths of the gross collection of the Zemindar is sometimes extorted from the Ryot. When the Ryot falls into arrear with the government, the latter pay themselves by seizing his personal property, his implements of husbandry, his cattle, and his slaves, which are disposed of at public auction!"—Statistics of Bri. tish Empire, p. 188.

We do not doubt that three fifths, or even more, of the gross produce are taken by the Zemindar. The proportion must be immense, when lands sell at “25 to 100 years' purchase" of the rent. So long as the company, the great landholder