Definition
In Hindu law, a ghout is a levy or tribute equal to one-fourth of the sum in dispute or in question. The term carries two closely related applications:
1. Procedural/litigation context: A fourth part of the sum in litigation — a fractional share exacted in connection with a legal claim or dispute.
2. Revenue/tribute context: The "Mahratta chout" (also spelled "chauth") refers specifically to a tribute of one-fourth of the territorial revenues exacted by the Maratha confederacy from subjugated or threatened regions, particularly across the Indian subcontinent during the 17th and 18th centuries.
Common Confusion
"Ghout" and "chout" (or "chauth") appear to be variant transliterations of the same underlying concept. Researchers encountering either spelling in historical sources are likely looking at the same legal and fiscal institution. The spelling in Black's reflects one phonetic rendering of a term that appears in colonial-era British administrative and legal records under several forms. Do not treat variant spellings as distinct legal instruments without corroborating context.
Why It Matters in Research
This term is unlikely to appear in modern legal proceedings but is a meaningful research term in two specific contexts:
First, for historians and legal scholars working with colonial-era Anglo-Indian law, revenue administration, or the governance structures imposed on or inherited from the Maratha Empire, ghout/chauth is essential vocabulary. British East India Company records, revenue settlement documents, and early colonial court decisions touching on tribute obligations in the Deccan and surrounding regions may use this term or its variants without explanation.
Second, the term illustrates a broader challenge in researching Hindu law through Western legal dictionaries: Black's 2nd Edition Supplemental captures the term, but only at the surface level. The Maratha chauth was a highly developed fiscal institution with its own administrative machinery, enforcement mechanisms, and political legitimacy — none of which is recoverable from the dictionary entry alone. Researchers relying solely on the Black's definition for substantive understanding of this institution will be significantly underinformed.
Transliteration inconsistency is a persistent trap. Colonial records, East India Company documents, and 19th-century legal treatises on Hindu and Maratha law may render the same term as ghout, chout, chauth, chouthe, or other variants. Cross-referencing across spelling forms is essential.
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's Law Dictionary (2nd Ed., Supplemental) provides a compact but accurate two-part definition: the general meaning (a fourth of the sum in litigation) and the specific Maratha application (a fourth of revenues exacted as tribute). This is among the more geographically and historically specific entries in the Black's supplemental materials, reflecting the practical need of 19th- and early 20th-century Anglo-Indian legal practitioners to have access to indigenous legal terminology.
What the entry does not capture: the political and military context of Maratha revenue extraction, the distinction between chauth as a negotiated tribute arrangement versus a coerced exaction, or the administrative office of the chauthai (the official responsible for collecting the levy). For these dimensions, researchers must move beyond the legal dictionary to primary historical and administrative sources.
No other major historical legal dictionaries in the standard reference corpus (Bouvier, Burrill, Wharton) appear to include an entry for this term, making Black's Supplemental the primary dictionary authority for its narrow legal definition in the Anglo-American reference tradition.
Jurisdictional Note
This term is historically specific to the Indian subcontinent, particularly the territories under Maratha influence and later British colonial administration. It has no application in common law jurisdictions outside the Anglo-Indian legal tradition and is not operative in any modern legal system.