on payment to the proprietors of the usual rate of a rupee per full-sized tree, and for young trees cut out in thinnings under the direction of the Conservator the rate which was in force for such material; and that the proprietors should have the privilege of obtaining permission to fell timber within their lands bona fide for their own buildings and requirements. Farish pointed out that the effect of the proposed measures would not be fully seen for twenty years, adding, we are now in 1839 perceiving the effect of the retrograde movement in 1821, and it will not be till the approach of 1860 that the advantages of any changes now adopted will be well appreciated," and therefore the means which may be adopted must not be ephemeral or liable to be changed by future Governments; they must be continued for at least thirty years to show their effect, and any record of their success must be made with reference to that distant period."

Farish did not approve the suggestion of levying a high duty on small-sized material with the object of attempting to stop the felling of immature trees. Being of opinion that the measures advocated for Malabar should be applied to all the forests of the provinces he sent the whole correspondence to Williams with, as desired by Madras, the request that he should report on the "present extent and condition of the timber for the joint information of the two Governments." This was adopted and the whole subject was reported to the Court of Directors (May, 1839).

Williams submitted two reports on the forests in the same month. In his forest report he stated that timber was selling at a very high price because the timber market had fallen into the hands of three or four moneyed natives who, by advancing sums of money from time to time to the forest proprietors, contrived to get many of them into debt and thus created a monopoly. He had made arrangements direct with some of the proprietors for a supply of timber. He mentioned that the timber of the Nilumbur Forests was the very best in all Malabar and the supply likely to last six or eight years. In his second letter he confirmed the report as to the reckless devastation which had been committed in the Malabar Forests, and he also commented strongly on the crude methods of exploitation in force, "logs were pushed over declivities, sometimes of hundreds of feet, thereby causing rents in the timber and contributing in some measure to its inferiority." Within the two preceding months

from the time he wrote it appeared that forty thousand young trees had been floated down from the jungles from forests in the neighbourhood of Wada Kancherry, "the diameter of which was under 6 inches." As the proprietors sold their trees for a rupee each he suggested that Government should purchase a number and leave them to be felled at some future period. Williams said that the Government of Madras only possessed proprietary rights in three forests in the vicinity of Palghaut; that those forests contained from five to six hundred trees, but very few young trees, as all the young growth was destroyed by the annual burning of the grass in the dry season. He recommended the preservation and improvement of the Palghaut Forests as a reserve to meet in after years the requirements of Government.

Farish wrote a second Minute dated 25th June, 1839, in connection with these reports. He considered that the information submitted by Williams strongly corroborated what had been assumed to be the state of the forests in his previous Minute, and that there was an obvious deficiency of timber owing to the reckless exploitation. He again advocated precautionary measures for the preservation and improvement of the forests. He considered the suggestion of purchasing the trees on the ground by the payment of the Kooty Kunum (i.e. the customary rate of R.1 per tree) to the proprietors was a judicious one" if no method of obtaining the royalty of the forests" as recommended in his previous Minute could be devised. But such purchase should be extensive so as to embrace all exhausted teak tracts which were situated favourably for water carriage, and to include the right of controlling the management of the forest, in order to prevent the burning of the forests and to make provision for planting and protection of young growth.

A copy of the Minute and the reports were sent to the Madras Government, and Williams was deputed to personally inspect other forest tracts.

Farish's first Minute had been sent to the Board of Revenue, Madras, and at their request the principal Collector of Malabar, now Mr. Underwood, submitted a long report on the Malabar Forests in which he reviewed at length their history under British occupation. Underwood divided his report into the heads-Royalty, Conservator, Reopening of the Timber Forests and Proposed Measures for Preserving the Forests.

On the subject of royalty Underwood drew attention to the

fact that when Tippoo Sahib took possession of the Province of Malabar, in exercise of his rights as conqueror, he annihilated private rights in the forests and created a monopoly in the forests, working them himself. From Tippoo's own statement it appeared that by this measure he gained a revenue of Rs.90,000 annually, exclusive of charges. "He, however, so far recognised the right of the proprietors as to make them an allowance of two fanams per tree of 10 inches diameter." Tippoo appeared to have first assumed the royalty of the forest in 1784-5, and Underwood argued that on the cession of the country by him the Company's Government acquired the same rights. The monopoly was re-established by the Conservator in 1806 and by the proclamation of the Madras Government of 25th April, 1807, when the Sovereignty of the Forests was assumed, and continued to 1822-3, the Conservatorship being then abolished. The forests, he argued, therefore "belonged so far to Government that their destruction cannot be permitted, as this would be an infringement of this right; and, on the other hand, they are bona fide the property of individuals who are entitled to the entire profits to be derived from the timber: this right has been freely exercised so as nearly to extinguish the right of Government, and it is high time that they should take prompt and immediate measures to preserve their interests from destruction by the exhaustion of the forests." On the subject of the Conservator Underwood added one fresh item of importance, namely, " that he could not discover any record that any of the Conservators had taken any steps to perpetuate the forests, as he could not discover that any of them had planted a single tree." The result of the reopening of the forests to timber traders, on the abolishment of the Conservatorship, was the reckless and ruinous exploitation of the forests which followed, though very different results were anticipated, as was evidenced in the Minute of Sir Thomas Munro (the Governor who had abolished the Conservatorship). In this Minute Sir Thomas said that the merchants and agriculturists were "too good traders not to cultivate teak or whatever wood is likely to yield a profit. They are so fond of planting. . . . To encourage them no regulation is wanted, but a free market. Restore the liberty of trade in private wood: let the public be guarded by its ancient protector, not a stranger, but the Collector and Magistrate of the country, and we shall get all the wood the country can yield more certainly than by any restrictive measures.

Private timber will be increased by good prices, and trade and agriculture will be free from vexation." This pious hope showed a complete ignorance of the point of view of the private proprietors of forests and of timber merchants and their methods of working, and sounded the death-knell of hundreds of thousands of acres of fine teak forests.

Underwood's measures for protection were :

Firstly, revival of the Company's right of Royalty in the forest by proclamation.

Secondly, the revival of the Conservatorship with abridged powers, the Collector to be an ex officio Conservator.

Thirdly, the purchase of tracts in exhausted forests with a view to their replantation.

Fourthly, that Government should work their own forests, cutting down all timber but teak, in order to replant them with teak.

Fifthly, the appointment of a joint Agent by the Government of Bombay and Madras for the purchase of timber, the Agent to be separate and distinct from the Conservator.

To obtain timber supplies Underwood suggested three methods :

(a) To purchase in the market.

(b) To make large contracts, and

(c) To purchase forests either in perpetuity or for a series of years, and so obtain exclusive rights of felling upon payment of the stipulated amount.

He advocated the last method. Underwood added, that some proprietors were already beginning to complain of the felling methods of contractors, by which young trees were cut down, and he thought that the proprietors would welcome the re-establishment of the Conservatorship.

Underwood's report is full of interest, and shows a considerable insight into the position of the Malabar Forests, and was a decided advance on the views held by his predecessor.

In reviewing Farish's first Minute and Underwood's Report the Madras Board of Revenue (November, 1839) objected to the survey of the forests as being a work of useless labour and expense, since the Government could only obtain the proprietary rights in three forests in Palghaut; on the subject of the purchase of all tracts of forest land in which teak had been totally exhausted in order to replant them the Board thought that further experience was required before they could

recommend the proposal. They also doubted whether the right of royalty after having been abandoned for a number of years could be legally revived by proclamation, and advised a reference to the legal authorities. They agreed to the other recommendations in the reports, noticing that an Agent had been already appointed to purchase timber, and they accepted the proposal that the post should be distinct from the Conservatorship.

In February, 1840, the Court of Directors reviewed the whole history of the forestry question from the date of their order of August, 1800, down to the date of Farish's Minute of April, 1839. They considered a survey unnecessary, since surveys had been carried out in Malabar and Canara in 1805-6, and though supplies of timber, reported to exist at that time, would not be applicable to 1840, yet sufficient information must have been collected to make a second survey unnecessary. The Court remarked that the Palghaut Forests in Malabar and others of considerable extent in Canara were admitted to be public property. If these were inadequate for the Government demand a properly qualified person should be deputed to select other suitable tracts of which the Government should endeavour to obtain the complete ownership. They did not approve of Farish's "royalty or forest right" proposals, as if the price of timber rose it would engender dissatisfaction among the proprietors. They considered that there would be no advantage in purchasing more land than was actually required to make provision of the Government's needs in forestry materials. The forests not required for this purpose should be left in private ownership, but they suggested that a high rate of duty should be placed on all teak felled under a certain size in order to act as a deterrent to the felling of such trees. The Court desired the Government of India to give the whole subject their early and attentive attention and to exercise their own discretion with regard to the instructions to be issued to Local Governments; but they reiterated their "anxious wish that in the prosecution of the survey, if such a measure should appear necessary, and of the ulterior operations, the utmost care may be taken to avoid any infringement of the rights or any unnecessary interference with the convenience of private persons."

This expression of opinion on the part of the Court is of high interest. Even at that distant date the Home authorities always evinced the greatest concern for the welfare of the