Research for this paper was supported by an Australian Research Council Large Grant for the project “The Effects of Capitalist Penetration and Control on Artisanal Fisheries in Colonial South Asia, c.1793–1947”, which has been administered by Curtin University.

¹ Khin, U, Fisheries in Burma (Rangoon: Superintendent of Printing and Stationery, 1948), p. 2. The report was written by U Khin in India in 1943 and published in 1948.Google Scholar

² Ibid., p. 2. For the Indian Industrial Commission's remarks see Great Britain, Parliamentary Papers, Report of the Indian Industrial Commission, 1916–18 [Cmd. 51] of 1919, p. 44.

³ U Khin, Fisheries in Burma, p. 85.

⁴ Ibid., p. 1. See Yoe, Shway, The Burman. His Life and Notions (London: Macmillan, [rep. 3rd ed. 1910], 1927), pp. 280–85 on ngapi.Google Scholar

⁵ The best of these is U Khin, Fisheries in Burma, chs. 3 and 4, because he discusses the whole country. He also discusses marine fishing on the coasts, but we are not dealing with those matters in this paper. More detailed accounts for particular delta districts are: [Hall, W.T.], Report on the Fisheries in the Henzada District for the year 1886 (Rangoon: Government Press, 1886),Google Scholar ch. 2; and [Maxwell, F.D.], Report on Inland and Sea Fisheries in the Thongwa, Myaungmya, and Bassein Districts and report on the Turtle Banks of the Irrawaddy Division (Rangoon: Superintendent, Government Printing, 1904), ch. 4. Reports by F.L. Seaton on fisheries in the Pegu, Hanthawaddy, Thongwa, Myaungmya and Bassein districts (1876–79) and by H.S. Mathews on Thongwa district (1892) have not yet been seen by us. As discussed more fully below, India's first Inspector-General of Fisheries, Dr Francis Day, made the first report on Burmese fisheries, in 1869.Google Scholar

⁶ U Khin, Fisheries in Burma, p. 27; there is further detail on these inn on p. 28. See also Max, and Ferrars, Bertha, Burma (London: Sampson, Low, Marston; New York: Dutton, 1901), pp. 48–49 for description and photograph.Google Scholar

⁷ Bown, A.M., Photographs of Some Burmese Fishing Implements (Rangoon: Superintendent of Government Printing, 1929), pp. 7–8Google Scholar for photographs of these screens in place; these were produced as a supplement to Bown's Note on the Revision of Fishing Implement Schedules, 1929. Ferrars and Ferrars, Burma, pp. 89–93, has discussion and photographs of fishing in inn. See also Nisbet, John, Burma under British Rule — and Before, 2 vols. (London: Constable, 1901), vol. I, pp. 354–61, for details of inn fishing.Google Scholar

⁸ This procedure is discussed and illustrated in Ferrars, Burma, p. 90.

⁹ Maxwell, Report on Inland and Sea Fisheries, pp. 84–85. Shway Yoe, The Burman, in discussing the pre-colonial revenue system makes the point that after the ngwedaw, the house tax, which was the main source of income for the state, there were “imposts on produce”: “Fishermen had to pay in coin or fish paste for each of their nets or fish traps; sometimes the fisheries were farmed out.” Pine (or paing) refers to the monetary unit pie, 12 of which made one anna. The figures represent a tax calculated in tickals of silver (1 tickal = 16.96 grammes).

¹⁰ U Khin, Fisheries in Burma, p. 1.

¹¹ Maxwell, Report on Inland and Sea Fisheries, p. 85. Furnivall, J.S., An Introduction to the Political Economy of Burma (Rangoon: Burma Book Club, 2nd ed., 1938), p. 246,Google Scholar remarks simply: “Fisheries were regarded as private property in Burmese times. The British Government has always treated them as the property of the State.”

¹² U Khin, Fisheries in Burma, p. 87; Maxwell conceded that “this action no doubt interfered unduly with the rights of the original owners” but, far from condemning this, he argued that the change paved “the way for introduction of a system of fishery administration on right lines. If it were not for this the existence of private rights of ownership would have seriously interfered with the successful working of the said system in much the same manner as the existence of Zamindari rights has rendered the Indian Fisheries Act of 1897 to remain a dead letter in Bengal.”

¹³ Maxwell, Report on Inland and Sea Fisheries, p. 85.

¹⁴ British Library, Oriental and India Office Collections [hereafter OIOC], P/437/63, India Foreign (Revenue-Irrigation), A Sep. 1870, proceeding no. 1, Assistant Secretary to Chief Commissioner, Burma-Secretary, Foreign Dept., 18 Jun. 1870, forwards report.

¹⁵ OIOC, P/437/65, India Foreign (Revenue-Irrigation), A Sep. 1870, prog, no 1, CC Burma-Offg. Sec PWD, India, 11 May 1870, para. 2.

¹⁶ Day, “Fisheries of India (Cuttings, etc.)”, Cheltenham Public Library, The Day Library of Natural History, Q658. A book of newspaper cuttings Day gathered during that trip is preserved in the Cheltenham Public Library, which was bequeathed his books and papers to establish “The Day Library of Natural History”.

¹⁷ Day's early writings all relate to this service; see The Land of the Permauls; or Cochin, its past and its present (Madras: Gantz Bros at Adelphi Press, 1863);Google ScholarOn the fishes of Cochin on the Malabar Coast of India (London: Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, Jan. 1865);Google Scholar and The fishes of Malabar (London: Bernard Quaritch, 1865).Google Scholar

¹⁸ For a broader appreciation of Day's ichthyological work see Whitehead, P.J.P. and Talwar, P.K., “Francis Day (1829–89) and his collections of Indian fishes”, Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Studies 5,1 (1976): 32–41.Google Scholar

¹⁹ In 1871 his brief was broadened to include a review of both sea and freshwater fisheries of India and Burma. He produced similar preliminary reports for each of the areas he visited — Assam, the North-Western Provinces, Punjab, Sind and Madras — and these preliminary reports were compiled as Sea-fish and Fisheries of India and Burma and Freshwater Fish of India and Burma, both of which were published by the Government of India in 1873. Day then retired to complete his magnum opus, entitled The Fishes of India: being a natural history of the fishes known to inhabit the seas and fresh waters of India, Burma and Ceylon, 2 vols. (London: Bernard Quaritch, 1876, 1878).Google Scholar An abridgement was later made by Blandford, W.T. in the “Fauna of British India” series and published in 2 volumes (London: Taylor and Francis, 1889).Google ScholarThe Fishes of India, of course, drew heavily upon the taxonomic work in the two reports.

²⁰ Day, “A Tour Through Some of the Indian Fisheries”, ch. v, in The Day Library of Natural History, Cheltenham, Q651; Day, Report on the Fresh Water Fish and Fisheries of India and Burma (Calcutta: Superintendent of Government Printing, 1873), pp. 49, 55 of the main report and pp. cxcii–cxcviii, ccxxii–ccxxiv of the appendices to the report.Google Scholar

²¹ Maxwell, Report on Inland and Sea Fisheries, pp. 1–2, 113.

²² OIOC, P/437/63, India Foreign (Revenue-Irrigation), A Sep. 1870, Sec. Foreign Dept.-CC British Burma, 23 Aug. 1870; P/753, India Foreign (Revenue-Irrigation), A Feb. 1871, proc. no. 14, Sec. to CC-Sec. Foreign Dept, 12 Dec. 1870.

²³ Sec. to CC-Day, 3 Aug. 1868 in Day, Report (1873), p. cxcvii.

²⁴ OIOC, P/437/65, India Foreign (Revenue-Irrigation), A Sep. 1870, prog. no. 1, CC Burma-Offg. Sec PWD, India, 11 May 1870, para. 3. Fytche, in a marginal note to his point about the improvidence of the Burmans, noted that his observation “include[ed] also the other cognate races of the province, Karens, Shans, Talines, etc.”. His “Talkies” were the Talaing, the name which the Burmese gave to the Mon people of the Pegu region.

²⁵ Ibid., para. 4.

²⁶ Ibid., para. 9.

²⁷ Ibid., para. 11.

²⁸ “Remarks by His Excellency … on Report of the Chief Commissioner, British Burma …”, Ibid., p. 4.

²⁹ Ibid., prog. no. 2, “Extract from the Proceedings of the Government of India, in the Foreign Dept.”, 20 Sep. 1870.

³⁰ OIOC, P/753, India Foreign (Revenue-rrigation), A Jul. 1871, prog. no. 10, Asst. Sec. to CCSec. Foreign Dept., 7 Nov. 1870, para.2 and prog. no. 11, “Memorandum on a revised Revenue Settlement for British Burma … dated 1st Oct. 1870”; India Foreign (Revenue-Irrigation), A Feb. 1871, prog. no. 14, Sec. to CC-Sec. Foreign Dept., 12 Dec. 1870.

³¹ OIOC, P/753, India Foreign (Revenue-Irrigation), A Jul. 1871, prog. no. 11, para. 6.

³² OIOC, P/753, India Foreign (Revenue-Irrigation), A Feb. 1871, prog. no. 17, Under Sec. Foreign Dept.-CC, British Burma, 3 Feb. 1871.

³³ OIOC, P/678, India Agriculture, Revenue and Commerce, A Jul. 1871, prog. no. 2, CC British Burma-Sec. Foreign Dept., 25 Mar. 1871. The file had been transferred by the Foreign Dept. to Agriculture, Revenue and Commerce for disposal on 15 Jun. 1871.

³⁴ Ibid., para. 27.

³⁵ Ibid., paras. 29, 30.

³⁶ Ibid., prog. no. 3, Sec. Agriculture, Revenue and Commerce-CC, British Burma, 4 Jul. 1871.

³⁷ OIOC, P/678, India Agriculture, Revenue and Commerce, prog. no. 3, Asst. Sec. to CC-Sec. Agric. Rev. and Comm., 4 Apr. 1872.

³⁸ Ibid., prog. no. 4, “Extract from the Proceedings of the Chief Commissioner of British Burma, in the Revenue Department … 4th April 1872”, paras. 2–4.

³⁹ The proviso should be noted; if accepted — and it was accepted — this allowed non-fishers, i.e., local capital, to form a “company” in which fishers would be simply “front men” for capital.

⁴⁰ Ibid., para. 5. The Bill is in progs, no. 5 and 6.

⁴¹ Ibid., progs, no. 7, Under Sec. Agric. Rev. and Comm.-Sec. Foreign, 25 Apr. 1872, and no. 8, Sec. Foreign Sec. Agric, Rev., and Comm., 27 Jun. 1872.

⁴² Ibid., prog. no. 9, Asst. Sec. CC-Sec. Agr. Rev. and Comm., 19 Jul. 1872.

⁴³ Ibid., prog. no. 10, Sec. Agr., Rev., Comm.-CC Burma, 6 Aug. 1872; P/678, India Agr., Rev., Comm., A Nov. 1872, progs, no. 1 and 2; P/678, India Agr., Rev., Comm., A Jan. 1874, progs, no. 1–10.

⁴⁴ OIOC, P/1172, India Agr., Rev., Comm., A May 1876, progs, no. 1–6; A Oct. 1876, progs, no. 1–3.

⁴⁵ See, for example, the appeal by the Commissioner of Pegu Division, 21 Jan. 1881, in P/1684, India Revenue and Agriculture (Fisheries) A Jul. 1882.

⁴⁶ OIOC, P/1684, India Revenue and Agriculture, A Jul. 1882, prog. no. 1, CC Burma-Sec. Agr. and Rev., 27 May 1882; P/2730, India Agr., Rev., A Oct. 1886, CC Burma-Sec. Agr., Rev., 19 May 1886; P/4985, India Agr., Rev., A May 1896, Rev. Sec. to CC-Sec, Agr., Rev., 23 Jan. 1896.

⁴⁷ OIOC, P/5445, India, Rev., Agr., A May 1898, progs, no. 1–2.

⁴⁸ Maxwell, Report on Inland and Sea Fisheries, p. 11.

⁴⁹ Ibid., p. 85.

⁵⁰ Ibid., p. 86.

⁵¹ Ibid., p. 87.

⁵² Ibid.

⁵³ Ibid., p. 102.

⁵⁴ Ibid., p. 102.

⁵⁵ Ibid., p. 130.

⁵⁶ OIOC, V/27/550/22, [Maxwell, F.D.], Supplementary Report on Inland and Sea Fisheries in the Thongwa, Myaungmya and Bassein Districts (10 Jul. 1899), p. 38.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Maxwell, Report on Inland and Sea Fisheries, ch. 9, “The Division of the Fisheries”.

⁵⁸ Maxwell, Supplementary Report, p. 38.

⁵⁹ Maxwell, Report on Inland and Sea Fisheries, p. 130.

⁶⁰ OIOC, V/27/550/22, “Minutes of the proceedings of a conference held by order of the Government of Burma to consider Captain Maxwell's report on the inland fisheries of Thongwa, Myaungmya and Bassein Districts of Lower Burma, and his report on the turtle banks of the Irrawaddy Division”, 26 Jun. 1899, pp. 271–79.

⁶¹ OIOC, P/6838, India Revenue and Agriculture, A Sep. 1904, prog. no. 1.

⁶² Andrus, J. Russell, Burmese Economic Life (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1947), p. 56;Google Scholar net licences — which, as Furnivall (Political Economy of Burma, p. 246) points out, were charged in “stretches of water that cannot conveniently be leased” — brought a further Rs 330,000.

⁶³ Christian, J.L., Modern Burma. A Survey of Political and Economic Development (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1942), pp. 155, 288.Google Scholar