TAXATION OF NATIVES IN NORTHERN NIGERIA. 
11 
so far as it was modified by the Resident, and consolidated and 
fixed alternatively at a money value, payable only once in 
the year, it inaugurated the beginnings of principles recognised 
in more advanced communities, and enabled the collection to be 
made in a manner in which the proceeds could best be utilised 
by the Administration, and accounted for in accordance with 
financial instructions, while it ensured a more just incidence 
and greater uniformity. 
The general tax thus embraced all taxes upon the village 
community. If the village was rich in herds and flocks it paid 
proportionately to its wealth. If it was an industrial com 
munity, which gained its livelihood by smelting and working 
iron, or by dyeing cloth, it similarly paid in proportion to its 
tax-paying capacity. The unit, so far as Government is con 
cerned, is the village, and the proportion to be paid by the indi 
vidual is left to the village headman, as in India.* 
Jangali. 
9. The taxation of nomad herdsmen, who have no settled 
village, had, however, to be undertaken separately, and for this 
reason a second tax, applicable only to them, viz., the jangali 
or cattle tax, was recognised. It was fixed at 5 per cent, instead 
of the former 10 per cent., and for the sake of facility in assess 
ment, large herds (especially those belonging to pagan commu 
nities), though not strictly nomad, were included in this cate 
gory. The taxation imposed under the “Native Revenue” 
Proclamation, No. 2, of 1906, is, therefore, shown under two 
heads, viz., the “general tax” and the “jangali,” though they 
are identical in principle, and in the course of time will 
probably be merged into one. 
Kurdin Sarauta. 
10. I have included in my review of the taxation under this 
Proclamation the tax called “ kurdin sarauta,” though it has, 
properly speaking, no place in this connection, and is not a 
tax which falls upon the population at large. The traditional 
custom in Northern Nigeria is that any person appointed to an 
office pays a fee on appointment. This led to great abuses, 
to the sale of offices, to bribery, and to continual deposition 
of holders. No appointment can now be made without the con 
currence of the Resident, and these abuses have, I think, wholly 
and absolutely ceased. It has been urged that the fee on 
appointment should be retained, and that half should be taken 
by Government, so that it should be the more obligatory upon a 
chief to report any appointments he desires to make, and That 
* I believe that under the Act of 1856 the Magistrate in India appoints 
a “ panchayet ” (native council of five) to apportion the tax imposed upon 
a village to the individuals. This is done (a) by actual valuation of 
property, which is rare, or (b) by their general knowledge of the circum 
stances of each individual, a system which works much better. The latter 
is the system of Northern Nigeria.