Of the revenue system in Dhulia district under the earliest Hindu rulers no authentic information is available. However, at the beginning of the British rule, the common belief was that in early Hindu times the land was held by tenant proprietors, mirasdars, and that tanats-at-will, upris, were introduced as the old proprietors sank under Mahammedan tyranny. This opinion was supported by the fact that most of the fields cultivated by tenants-at-will were entered in the village books as belonging to absent proprietors. This, in Mr Elphin-stone's opinion, when combined with circumstances observed in other puts of India and with the high land-tax authorised by Manu. afforded a strong presumption that the Hindu revenue system, if they had an uniform system, was founded on private property in the soil. So also no information about the revenue system under the Faruki kings (1370-1600) is available. Under Akbar's regime (1601-1605) the lands were surveyed and to a certain extent classified and assessments, to run for fixed periods, were imposed, based upon the natural qualities of the soil and the kind of produce it was able to yield. Later on the revenue system was modified by Malik Ambar who combined the two great merits of a moderate and permanent tax and the possession by the cultivators of an interest in the soil. One thing is true that whatever revenue changes were introduced either by Hindu or Musalman rulers, the internal features of village and district administration seem to have existed in the main unchanged from very early times. The husbandmen suffered much oppression at the hands of their immediate superiors. The land was tilled by for and consequently very ill tilled. These matters grew worse and under the Marathas some more burdens were imposed on the people. The earliest demand under Marathas consisted of the one-forth. chauth, of the land revenue. Later on Maratha exactions increased. Various assignments such as jagirs, mokasa, sahotra, babti. sardesh-mukshi etc., were made to individual chiefs and others for whom it was politic to make provisions. Besides these grants of certain portions of the revenue, many'proprietors held and collected the revenues of various estates. The whole system was most complicated and con-fused and people constantly suffered from it. The mamlatdars or kamavisdars earned salaries and had also various indirect means of making money. The evils were still aggravated when the Peshws towards the close of their rule took the step in changing the mamlatdars horn Government servants into yearly revenue farmers. Afterwards the British introduced the revenue survey in 1852 on the basis of the report submitted by Captain Wingate. The farming system introduced by the Peshwas was then abolished and the system of settling land revenue with individual cultivators was introduced which freed the cultivators from the district officers' demands as the powers of the hereditary officials were taken away. The settlement of the revenue was then no longer made with the headmen of the villages. The revenue; was fixed on the average payments of ten previous years. The revision survey settlement was afterwards commenced in 1886i and completed in 1904. The new survey enhanced the total revenue from 81 to 40 lakhs. The average assessment per acre' of 'dry' sand was Rs. 1.37: of rice land Rs. 1.62; and of garden land. Rs. 2.87.