Читать книгу Burmah and the Burmese онлайн

48 страница из 59

It is, however, somewhat remarkable, as Crawfurd observes,[58] that “a direct tax on the land, according either to its extent or fertility, is not known to the Burmese.” This, though forming a source of much emolument in other Oriental countries, appears to be wholly unknown here. Its place is supplied by the family tax, above mentioned. This family, or more correctly property-tax, is confined to the Burmese, Talains (Peguers), and a few naturalized foreigners. An extract from Alves’s Report will show its operation.[59] “The arbitrary assessments for various purposes, which were levied upon the Burmese and Talains, amounted annually, I am informed, to about 50,000 ticals[60] on ordinary occasions, for the two townships of Bassein and Pantano. Bassein, the chief town of the province, was exempt from regular assessment, being subject to calls for the support of messengers or other public authorities from the capital, and for their travelling expenses. Pantano, and another district of the province, were exempt, as being assignments for the maintenance of their respective Myo-thugyis.[61] I might probably have obtained information regarding the amount of these arbitrary cesses in the other townships; but the subject of inquiry was rather a delicate one, and might have led to the belief that its continuance was contemplated under British sway. Besides, the tax was an ever-fluctuating one; information regarding it not very readily given; and the purpose for which the money was often required, I was told, was too ludicrous to bear repetition to an Englishman. The amount for the other township may be inferred from the above, and was probably about 127,000 ticals. On extraordinary occasions there was no limit to exactions of both men and money. It does not appear that assessments could have been properly ordered for other than public purposes, or under instructions from court; although the amount might not always find its way into the treasury of the State, it ought to have been expended in the service of the State. The principle of this tax seems to be that of a property-tax. A town or village having to pay a certain sum, the heads of wards, or principal people of the village, were called together by the Myo-thu-gyi or Thu-gyi, and informed of their quota in men and money to be furnished, and they assessed the householders agreeably to their means, or supposed means,—some having to pay, say fifty ticals, others one, or even less. I have been informed that there are tolerably correct accounts of the means of each householder; but on such occasions poverty is often pleaded, and it too frequently happens that confinement and torture are resorted to before the collection is completed. The system is obviously open to the greatest abuses, and although it is not against these abuses that the people generally exclaim, it is evident this is the most vexatious of all parts of the Burmese administration; and its abolition or modification would have been most desirable, had the country been retained. All persons in public employ were exempt from this tax—also artificers, as they had to work without pay, when required for public purposes, or for the business of the local officers.[62] Also the Mussulman and Chinese inhabitants at Bassein: the former, when required, being made to work as tailors; the latter, to manufacture gunpowder and fireworks. Both these classes, however, were compelled to make gunpowder, from the breaking out of the war until the arrival of the British armament at Bassein. There ought to have been no expense of collection, although it appears to have been perfectly understood, that the overplus exacted by the Thu-gyis on such occasions was their chief source of emolument.”