THE NATURE OF PROVINCIAL FINANCE 211
For the purposes of visualization the financial relationship between the Provinces and the Government of India may be likened to the Hindu Joint Family System with the Patria Potestas vested in the latter. Before 1870 the similarity between the two was more or less exact. Like the family property of the Hindus the revenues of India were jointly enjoyed by all the departments whether under Central or Provincial management without metes and bounds being fixed to the shares of any one of them. After 1870 the only change that took place consisted in the cesser of commensality and the fixing of metes and bounds to the shares of each in the common property according to their respective needs. The system remained a joint family system, although separate accounts were opened by the head of the family, namely the Government of India, to guard against any member overdrawing the amount placed to his credit.
Were these results worth striving for? On the results achieved in consequence of Provincial Finance a variety of opinion has been expressed. But if we judge of the results as we ought to in the light of the antecedents that gave rise to the system in 1870, it cannot be said that the hopes entertained were in any way belied. It is only when critics, solely because of their misunderstanding of the nature of Provincial Finance, sought for results which were never intended by its promotors that an adverse pronouncement came to be made. But if we keep clear of these misunderstandings and never lose sight of the fact that in 1870 what the Provinces wanted was freedom and the Government of India stability, none can assert that this compromise between Imperialism and Federalism was tried in vain. How great was the freedom gained by the [-] provinces can be appreciated only when it is realized that before 1870 the Governor of Bengal could make
“no alteration in the allowances of the public servants.... establish a new school or augment the pay of a daroga (watchman) to the extent of a Rupee,” [1 ]
nor could the Governor of Bombay have a lock made [2] without a vote of the Council of India. Nor can the importance of the large
1 Calcutta Review, Vol. 3, p. 169.
1 Report of the Committee on the Affairs of the East India Co., 1852, Vol. 10.