Theory of Government in Ancient India (Post-Vedic) c7.38.3

c7.38.3

If any one laid a false claim to it, he was to be fined one-eighth of his property or less if the value of the treasure trove was not enough to justify such a fine. Property of which the owner had disappeared must be deposited with the state. If unclaimed for three years, it was to lapse to the king. Any one who claimed it at all, must accurately describe its colour, shape, size, the number of its items, the time and place of its loss, etc. If he failed to do so, he should pay a fine equal in value to that of the article claimed. All this, however, does not apply to property stolen by thieves. That must be restored to its rightful owner of any caste whatever. If the king appropriates such goods, he incurs the guilt of a thief. If the king, that is, the state, discovered any old treasure hidden under ground, half of it must go to the royal exchequer and the other half be distributed among Brâhmaṇas. Not only of ancient hoards but also of the metals underground, the king was entitled to one-half for two reasons. In the first place, he gave protection to all. In the second place, he was the lord of the soil. Here Manu seems to indicate that essentially the state was the owner of the land. Numerous petty dues were levied at ferries. Their classification is curious.