Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’? : The End of Indian Indentured Labour 9780367676117, 9781003131991

Citation preview

WHY SHOULD WE BE CALLED ‘COOLIES’? A wide ranging study of the Indian indenture system from its early beginnings to its end in the early twentieth century that shows the complex and contested nature of the Indian indenture experience in all its multifaceted details. Professor Brij V. Lal The Australian National University The text represents years of work in India, the United Kingdom, Oceania and the Caribbean, weaving a major chapter in plantation studies. Professor Brinsley Samaroo Professor Emeritus, University of the West Indies, St. Augustine Dr. Radica Mahase’s study offers a brilliant and comprehensive account of the abolition of Indentured labour system. Her effort is indeed commendable as she critically explores the whole subject of migration of indentured from India to British colonies in Caribbean and Indian Ocean, and also the final termination of this system in 1920. Professor Kundan Tuteja Professor Emeritus, Kurukshetra University What are the dynamics of the abolition of the Indian indentureship system? Why was it ended? Who were the main players in the final end of the labour scheme? Were Indian labourers and/or the Indian middle classes actively involved in the processes leading towards complete abolition? This book examines the end of a labour system which lasted from 1838 until 1920 in various territories throughout the British Empire. It looks at methods of agitations which had their genesis in the territories of the Indian Ocean and compare/contrast these with those of other territories such as the British West Indies. The volume provides a comparative study of the abolition of the Indian indentureship system and shows the global interconnectedness of abolition, with a strong subaltern focus. Radica Mahase is Senior Lecturer, History, at the College of Science, Technology and Applied Arts of Trinidad and Tobago. She has a PhD, History from UWI, St. Augustine and a MA in Indian History from Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. She was a Commonwealth Visiting Scholar at the University of Manchester.

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Te End of Indian Indentured Labour

RADICA MAHASE

MANOHAR

First published 2021 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2021 Radica Mahase and Manohar Publishers & Distributors The right of Radica Mahase to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by her in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. Print edition not for sale in South Asia (India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Pakistan or Bhutan) British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested ISBN: 978-0-367-67611-7 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-003-13199-1 (ebk) Typeset in Minion Pro 11/13 by Ravi Shanker, Delhi 110095

To my Parents

boysie and satbham mahase

For teaching me to cherish, respect and understand my

Indo-Trinbagonian heritage. For teaching me everything. For the younger generation

vandani, rahul, maya, vaani, valini, varune, crystal and lisa May you appreciate, understand and cherish your History.

You’re my hope for the future

Contents

Preface

9

Introduction

11

1. Indian Indentureship in Context

28

2. Imperialist Structures

57

3. ‘Resistance from Within’: Labourer’s Resistance

against Indentureship

87

4. Fighting the System: Middle-class Indian Protests

in Labour-importing Territories

126

5. Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?:

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

148

6. Imperial Reconsiderations, Policy and Abolition

190

7. Conclusion

205

Index

219

Preface

We came to Dem’ra, With the name ‘coolie’, Why should we be called coolies, We who were born in the clans and families of seers and saints. (Protests Songs of East Indians in British Guiana)

The bulk of the research for this book was completed for my doc­ toral thesis. I am eternally grateful to my supervisors Prof. Kundan Tuteja and Prof. Brinsley Samaroo who helped me to conceptual­ ize my research and guided me throughout the years. They both believed in my academic capabilities and after all these years they have continued to act as my gurus, always encouraging and inspir­ ing me. My humblest appreciation to Prof. Majid Siddiqi and Prof. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya who supervised my first writings on the Indian indentureship system at the Centre for Historical Stud­ ies, Jawaharlal Nehru University. They introduced me to archival research, helped me develop analytical skills, showed me how to navigate my way around the Indian archives and were mentors, friends and the source of my intellectual inspiration. A special thank you to those friends who constantly encour­ aged and motivated me to complete this manuscript – Dr. Jerome Teelucksingh, Dr. Laura Carballido-Coria, Dr. Sharon Pillai, Sofia Papoutsi, Kevin Baldeosingh, Karishma Nanhu and Rishi Ram­ charan.

10

Preface

My family as usual, especially my sister Devika, has supported me throughout every endeavour – they alone know what sacrifices had to be made and words cannot express my appreciation for them. Radica Mahase

Introduction

I was standing on the bridge when the clock in the marketplace struck seven. From nowhere, two Muslim men, with feminine faces, approached me. I guessed they were money-minded and wicked men. Yet they were well dressed and looked like gentlemen, so I wished them ‘Salam-ala-chum’….’ Are you interested in doing a job? One of them asked. ‘What kind of job?’ I inquired. ‘A govern­ ment job’, one said and then asked me if I had any education. I told them that I had passed middle school. They responded happily and said that I could be a Sardar…. Such sugary talk swept me off my feet and I forgot everything: my family, my country and myself.1

In 1898, the year that the above scene took place, when Munshi Rahman Khan was approached by the arkatias, 1,390 labourers emigrated to Natal and 567 went to Fiji, while 618 crossed the Kala Pani bound for the Dutch colony of Suriname, 1,268 went to Trini­ dad and 2,380 left for British Guiana. Munshi Rahman Khan was just one out of 6,223 labourers who emigrated from India to ter­ ritories in other parts of the world in 1898.2 In fact, in 1907, almost ten years after Munshiji had settled in the colony, the Indian popu­ lation in British Guiana was 127,000; in Trinidad it was 103,000; in Mauritius it was 264,000, in Natal it was 115,000 while there were 13,000 Indians in Jamaica and 31,000 in Fiji.3 By 1901, when Munshiji became a Sardar on the Skerpi plantation in Suriname, the roots of an anti-indenture agitation movement had already been planted in India. Activists in India were attempting to discourage individuals from registering for the system in the districts of recruitment, while Indians from the

12

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

middle class were protesting against racial discrimination in South Africa. Fifteen years later, when Munshiji had established himself as a landowner and was able to help his sons to purchase land so that they could settle down as independent cultivators, the ‘abol­ ish indenture’ movement had been firmly established by Indian nationalists in India. In fact, only two years later, in 1917, Lord Hardinge, the Viceroy of India, announced that No native of India shall depart by sea out of British India for the purpose of or with the intention of labouring for hire in any country beyond the limits of India, provided that the prohibition imposed by this rule shall not extend to any person or class of persons permitted so to depart by general or special license granted by such authority as the Governor Gen­ eral may appoint on this behalf.4

Lord Hardinge’s announcement was the culmination of the concerted effort of different individuals and groups which tran­ scended caste and class; which questioned a labour scheme that was developed to facilitate the benefit of British sugar planters in various parts of the world. It encompassed those who had been indentured and completed/survived the system, those who were against the system in principle and those who engaged in power struggles with the colonizers. Though the key players had separate and distinct agendas, their reactions against the labour scheme came together, probably unintentionally, to lead to the final and complete abolition of the indentureship system. Abolition did not occur because British planters in sugarproducing colonies were inundated with labourers. This was far from the truth, as planters in colonies such as Fiji, Trinidad and British Guiana as well as the Dutch colony of Suriname continued to requisition labourers straight until 1917, the year when the last ‘coolie’ ships left the port of Calcutta. Planters from some of the British West Indian colonies even petitioned the Government of India after the system was ended, asking for another scheme to be implemented in the absence of indentureship. The termination of the labour system was not an overnight occurrence, neither was it an easy feat. It was a process which occurred over a period of time and was due to a variety of factors.

Introduction

13

It was the culmination of an intense agitation movement which grew out of Natal and later spread to Mauritius, Fiji and India. This anti-indenture campaign which emerged and steadily increased began as a humanitarian one and rapidly changed to become anti­ colonial and anti-imperial in nature. In its later stages, organized agitation was mainly geared towards highlighting the ineffective­ ness of British colonial rule and justifying the call for swaraj. The concerns for the labourers, that is, the humanitarian aspects, were visible in the early days of the campaign but later on, there was a focus on the inhuman aspects of the system so as to facilitate middle-class agenda in India. To some extent, the Indian nationalist campaign was aided by the resistance against the system which occurred from within the Indian population in the colonies where indentureship existed. In some cases, the Indian middle classes in these territories used the issues of the labourers as well as their protests (when these occurred) to draw attention to their situation and the conditions under which they were indentured. The labourers themselves also agitated against everyday conditions but they hardly ever called for a complete end to indentureship, and when they did their voices were often subsumed. Those labourers whose con­ tracts had terminated and those Indians who emigrated as freed persons – as both labourers and professionals – added a voice to the anti-indenture campaign but they did not expressively call for the end of the indentureship system per se. They agitated for improvements in their daily conditions and protested against their low status in the respective colonies, especially in Natal, Mauritius and Fiji. In addition to this, individuals and groups emerged in the districts of India where labourers were recruited. There, they made a concerted effort to prevent labourers from registering for, and leaving under the indentureship scheme. Thus, abolition came about due to the combined efforts of the labourers, individuals and organizations in the districts and the rigid campaign against the system which was waged by the Indian middle classes in the vari­ ous territories. The abolition of the Indian indentureship system was trans­ continental in nature. The modern indentured labour system

14

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

took shape and form in the Indian Ocean. The Indian Ocean was the epicentre of migration of indentured labourers and more indentured labourers went to the territories of the Indian Ocean; probably the reason why the seeds of abolition ultimately forms in the Indian Ocean. However, events which developed in the Indian Ocean impacted indentured labourers in the British West Indies and elsewhere. Spates of resistance and contestations in the British West Indies were in turn used by agitators in India to consolidate their position regarding the emigration of Indian labourers to foreign territories. Additionally, there was a regular flow of information from the Indian Ocean territories to India and vice versa. As such, abolition was global in nature; it was not geographically-controlled. In fact, a strong pan-regional, pancontinental perspective is visible, with clear linkages between the various labour-importing territories. There was also a distinct ‘subaltern’ component in the abolition process. The labourers in the various Indian Ocean and British West Indian territories impacted on the final abolition process in different ways. In the British West Indies their experiences of indentureship led to their contestation to daily conditions as visi­ ble in individual and group protests, petitions etc. In the territories of the Indian Ocean they voiced their grievances at mass meetings, petitioned to the colonial governments and protested against their everyday conditions like their counterparts in the British West Indies. In Mauritius, for example, the ‘old immigrants’, i.e. those who had completed their contracts, played a strong role in ques­ tioning the system. In some instances, labourers who completed their contracts and fulfilled all obligations, returned to India and exposed the adverse conditions of the indentureship system. Issues such as impoverishment, cruel treatment, sexual abuse of female indentured labourers, lack of payment of wages and so on, were openly discussed, letters were written to the Protector of Emigrants in Calcutta and petitions were sent to the Government of India. In 1914, the recruitment of labourers in India for the Indian indentureship system in various territories had been suspended for the period of First World War. This was due partly to the fact

Introduction

15

that the ships belonging to James Nourse Ltd. were contracted to transport labourers from Calcutta to the British West Indian colo­ nies and the territories of the Indian Ocean were requisitioned by the British Admiralty. Additionally, the seas were simply unsafe for the ‘coolie’ ships, given the constant bombings of sea vessels during the war. Consequently, it was simply too risky to transport this human cargo. Once the shipping of labourers stopped dur­ ing the war, individuals and groups who were agitating against the labour system were hopeful that the scheme would discontinue after the war ended. Thus, Viceroy Hardinge’s announcement was received with much celebration by the agitators. Interestingly, the Viceroy’s announcement prohibited the re­ cruitment and transportation of Indian labourers under the indentureship scheme but at the same time the system itself was not completely abolished. The announcement simply meant that no more labourers would be taken to the various colonies to work as contract labourers. The complete termination of the system hap­ pened only on 1 January 1920 when all contractual obligations of all labourers were terminated. It was only then that the Indian indentureship system ceased to exist completely in Jamaica, Trini­ dad, British Guiana, Fiji, and the Dutch colony of Suriname. The system which led to Munshiji’s transportation and relocation from a territory more than 10,000 miles away from his home had now completely ended. This book examines the historical process leading to the final abolition of Indian indentured labour. It is placed within the wider context of imperialism, anti-colonialism and nationalism. As such, it starts with the genesis and growth of the system under a British imperialist structure. This is followed by an investigation of the character of resistance which occurred – against British impe­ rialism and colonialism in general, and specifically against the Indian indentureship system. It examines the nature of interaction which occurred between Britain and her colonies and discusses the role of the indentured labourers and the Indian middle class in bringing about an end to the system. It focuses on internal contradictions which came to the fore during the indentureship period and shows that some forms of protests, such as those of the

16

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

indentured labourers were actually visible throughout the entire indentureship period. However, other more organized movements were visible from the 1870s onwards and increased in importance with the emergence of the twentieth century. Chapter 1 is a background chapter, setting the context for the abolition of the labour system. It examines the nature of British imperialist policies in India and discusses notions of colonial­ ism and economic exploitation. It shows that a cheap source of labour was valuable within the imperialist framework, especially if this labour could be transported from one part of the Empire to another. As British colonial rule in India led to the intensification of poverty, Indian labourers from the regions affected by British economic exploitation sought alternative methods of earning an income and some made the decision to emigrate within India and to foreign colonies as contract labourers. Chapter 2 examines the logistics of the indentureship system within an imperialist context. It shows the ideal theoretical situ­ ation as one whereby a scheme was developed to facilitate the transfer of labour from India to the Indian Ocean and the Brit­ ish West Indies, from which Britain could benefit economically. Thus, a system of contract labour was established with polices and regulations implemented to ensure that the system functioned as efficiently as possible in order to guarantee a continuous supply of labour. The regulations imposed were also meant to ensure that everyone who was involved in the scheme would benefit from it. However, this was not always the case and this resulted in conflict amongst the parties involved in the scheme, eventually setting the stage for the final abolition of the system. Chapter 3 investigates the ways in which domination was con­ tested in the everyday life of the indentured labourers in various colonies. It looks at the extent to which various forms of agitation by the labourers led to immediate changes in the system. It posi­ tions the Indian indentured labourers as dynamic participants in the contestation of the system. Although the agitation of Indians labourers was not sufficient to compel the British imperial govern­ ment to terminate the system, it contributed towards the general

Introduction

17

inefficiency and ineffectiveness of the scheme and was therefore significant in manipulating the manner in which the imperialists came to look at the emigration issue. It compares the contestations to the labour scheme which occurred in territories of the Indian Ocean and the British West Indies and accounts for the differences in agitation by the labourers themselves in these various territories. Chapter 4 discusses the protests by the Indian middle classes in the labour-importing colonies. Groups of Indian middle class in Natal, Mauritius and Fiji and the British West Indies were actively involved in open criticisms against the system. They protested at various levels against the inhumane conditions of the labourers and their protests were instrumental in drawing the attention of the British imperial government to the daily conditions of indentured labourers and free Indians. Their protests were also influential in the colonial policy-making process. The Indian middle class in the British West Indies, Fiji, Mauritius and Natal were certainly not homogeneous groups and as such, the middle-class experi­ ence differed according to the territory and the composition of the groups, as well as the ways in which they identified themselves and their relationships with India, the ‘Mother Country.’ Chapter 5 analyses the strong wave of agitation that emerged in India, the ‘Mother Country’. At one level, it looks at the attempts made at a district level to stop the emigration of Indians. At another level, criticism of Indian emigration to foreign territories in gen­ eral and the indentureship system specifically came from Indian nationalists in India. The Indian nationalists emphasized the infe­ rior status of Indians within the British Empire and their protests were part of the struggle against British rule and colonialism in India. This agitation created a framework whereby colonialism was challenged and the mass emigration of Indians, as part of this colonial framework was also contested. This chapter assesses the extent to which agitation in India presented a threat to the con­ tinuation of Indian emigration and evaluates the extent to which this agitation hindered the smooth operation of the scheme and forced the colonial authorities to implement structural changes in the system.

18

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Chapter 6 shows the extent to which issues in the various colo­ nies impacted on the policy-making process of the British Imperial Government and the Government of India. The questions raised by those who were questioning the system or agitating for the end of the scheme influenced the attitude of the colonial authorities. This chapter analyses the interaction that occurred amongst the Colonial Office, the Government of India and the colonies which imported indentured labourers. It also discusses the extent to which certain issues influenced changes in the logistics of the indentureship system and threatened the British imperialist framework. It raises the question of India’s role in protecting Indian indentured labourers and India’s interaction with the British Imperial Govern­ ment in that progress towards the final termination of the labour scheme. This book draws heavily on a wide variety of sources from various geographical areas such as the Caribbean, Mauritius, India and the United Kingdom. Given the gaps in the existing histori­ ography, it relied almost extensively on primary sources. Sources include but are not limited to documents generated by the colo­ nial authorities in various territories; newspapers and gazetteers in India, Mauritius, Fiji, Trinidad and British Guiana; private papers of various individuals and organizations; interviews with inden­ tured labourers as well as oral tradition.

Historiography There is a very rich, formidable compilation of writings on various aspects of the Indian indentureship system. Writings on the inden­ tureship system started as early as the 1930s in the form of letter to editors in territorial newspapers emphasizing various aspects of the labour scheme. These became more formalized from the 1950s onwards with the proliferation of articles and books. The existing historiography has touched on various aspects of imperi­ alism, Indian emigration, the structure of the system, settlement in the different colonies and other themes dealt with in this book. The available literature is quite rich and comprehensive for some themes while it is still evolving for others.

Introduction

19

First, there is a body of writing which examines indentureship at a global level. These located indentureship as one labour scheme within the wider context of imperialism and have given a global perspective of indentured labour. This literature deals with British imperialism and the way in which it has influenced or instigated the movement of people from one area to another. Works of David Northup, Hugh Tinker, Eric Hobsbawm and Sabyasachi Bhatta­ charya opened up discussions on this topic5 with writings which focused on one aspect or another of various labour systems within the imperialist structure, or as a substratum of imperialism and/ or colonialism. The focus has been on the system as one part of a wider framework. Northrup’s work, Indentured Labour in the Age of Imperialism 1834-1922, is one of the most comprehensive attempts to locate indentureship within the wider context of imperialism and global developments. It gives an overview/comparative study of inden­ tured labour from Asia, Africa and the Pacific Islands.6 Northrup looks at various levels of contract labour and links indentured labour to ‘new imperialism.’ He shows the way in which capital investment, new technologies and an interest in colonial acqui­ sitions influenced the demand for indentured labour in various parts of the world. On another level, Hugh Tinker’s, A New System of Slavery looks partially at both the way in which the labour scheme oper­ ated within the global system of labour as well as the dynamics of the structure of the system itself. Tinker’s work is probably the most comprehensive account of the structure of indentureship as a labour system. In his in-depth analysis, he has shown the limita­ tions in the system and the similarities it exhibited in relation to African enslavement. Tinker emphasized the difference between the theoretical basis of the labour scheme and showed that the reality of the system far surpassed the way in which the imperial authorities deemed it worked. In a seminal article entitled, ‘Labour Forms and International Labour Flows in the Context of North-South Relationships: An Overview’ Sabyasachi Bhattacharya has shown how British imperialist policies in India created the situation whereby Indian

20

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

labourers saw the indentureship system as a viable economic option. Indentured labour was located within the entire context of British imperial policies. Agency is placed on the hands of the British who created the indentureship system and who created the situations in the villages and districts of India that would act as a feeder for the system. Thus, British policies in India created a large impoverished population which sought an outlet from poverty and which provided the labourers necessary to fulfil the wants of British planters. Second, there is a substantial body of literature on indentureship pertaining to specific labour-importing territories. These have shown a tendency towards the examination of the socio­ economic aspects of the system, culture, legislation, economics and politics. Topics such as cultural transplantation, gender issues and economic and socio-political contributions of the labourers have been dealt with by various historians over the years. While there is a distinct body of historical research on various aspects of the labour scheme in the Caribbean, there is a discrepancy, as the bulk of the work exists on Trinidad and Guyana (British Guiana), while some of the smaller islands have been missing in the existing literature. Historians such as Brinsley Samaroo, K.O. Laurence, Verene Shepherd, Walton Look Lai, Rhoda Reddock, Maurits Hassankhan, Lomarsh Roonarine and Bridget Brereton have examined various aspects of the system7 such as the struc­ ture of the indentureship system and the settlement of Indians in the colonies; comparisons of Indian indentureship and African enslavement; settlement and contribution of the Indians; the transportation of an Indian cultural heritage and the manner in which this has shaped the Caribbean countries. K.O. Laurence’s A Question of Labour: Indentured Immigration into Trinidad and British Guiana 1875-1917 is one of the most distinctive work on indentureship, coming out of the Caribbean. Laurence focused on the structure of the labour scheme from time of recruitment to settlement in the colonies. He gives a clinical discussion of the manner in which the system was structured and administered in the colony and the impact of indentureship on the colonies with

Introduction

21

a focus on the negotiations amongst colonial authorities in Brit­ ish Guiana, Trinidad and England. He links indentured labour to sugar production and relies heavily on colonial record-keeping to give a statistical tabulation of the system. For Fiji, the historiography of indentureship has been domi­ nated by the writings of historians such as Brij Lal, John D. Kelly and K.L. Gillion. John D. Kelly’s A Politics of Virtue: Hinduism, Sexuality, and Countercolonial Discourse in Fiji focuses on the political conflicts amongst Hindus in Fiji starting with the inden­ tureship period and then the post-indentureship era. Kelly focused on sexuality and the role it played in the abolition of Indian inden­ tured labour in 1919. He has emphasized cases of violence towards female indentured labourers in Fiji as one aspect of the control and subordination of Indian labourers. More importantly though, is his discussion of the manner in which issues of violence towards Fiji’s female indentured labourers were projected in the discourse leading towards the end of the indentureship system. Also impor­ tant to note is K.L. Gillion’s Fiji’s Indian Migrants: A History to the End of Indenture in 1920 which discusses various aspects of Indian settlement in Fiji. Gillion analysed some of the main issues that were incorporated in the abolition campaigns and focuses on changes in Fiji.8 Brij Lal’s various works such as Chalo Jahaji: On a Journey Through Indenture in Fiji and Bittersweet: The Indo-Fijian Experience, as well as other books and numerous articles, provided a comprehensive investigation into different issues pertaining to indentureship in that territory on the whole. Writing on a variety of topics, Lal has clinically discussed indentureship and the Indian diaspora in Fiji through an analysis of the system as it existed, impact on the Fiji socio-economic structure as well as culture and politics. The historiography for Mauritius was initially dominated by Marina Carter. Carter’s main works include Voices from Indenture: Experiences of Indian Migrants in the British Empire; Servants, Sirdars and Settlers: Indians in Mauritius and Lakshmi’s Legacy: Testimonies of Indian Women in 19th Century Mauritius.9 Using a variety of sources Carter has been able to bring out the voices of

22

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

the subalterns in her works, providing details into the workings of a colonial labour scheme by often analysing indentureship from the labourers’ perspective. Regarding South Africa, there have been some general studies on Indian indentureship which analysed various aspects of the system such as structure, penal codes, repatriation and discrimi­ nation. In fact, a substantial part of the existing historiography for South Africa deals with discrimination against both free and indentured Indians. Another substantial part focuses on Gan­ dhi and his attempts to end discriminations against Indians and Asiatics in general in that territory. Earlier seminal studies such as G.H. Calpin’s Indians in South Africa, P.S. Joshi’s The Tyranny of Colour: A Study of the Indian Problem in South Africa and Fatima Meer’s Portrait of Indian South Africans provide the basis for fur­ ther works on Indians and indentureship in South Africa.10 More recent studies have attempted to focus on newer themes and to give Indian indentured labourers agency in the wider colonial dis­ course. In the case of Suriname, there has been an upsurge in writings on Indian indentured labourers in recent times. The existing his­ toriography has been deeply enriched by writings from Maurits Hassankhan, Mohan Gautam and other researchers writing on various aspects of indentureship and Indians in Suriname. These range from the only published autobiography of an Indian inden­ tured labourer, Autobiography of an Indian Indentured Labourer (1874-1972) written by Munshi Rahman Khan11 to more recent edited volumes by Hassankhan containing essays on a variety of topics on the Indian Diaspora in Suriname.12 Third, the literature pertaining to underlying themes which forms the basis of this research, such as resistance and abolition, is more limited as compared to literature on general aspects of the indentureship system or even territory-specific writings. In the first instance, resistance by Indian indentured labourers is one component of the indentureship system which has so far been neglected in the broad field of labour history. Unfortunately, the existing historiography has neglected the impact of resistance of indentured labourers on the policy-making process of the British

Introduction

23

Imperial Government. The Government of India’s reaction to this type of resistance has also been underdeveloped. Furthermore, there has been an inclination towards the categorization of meth­ ods of resistance into active and passive resistance.13 Most of the writings have focused more in the manner in and extent to which the labourers were controlled within the plantation system. This is evident in the works of Lomarsh Roopnarine and Kusha Harak­ singh, for example; both authors examined the ways in which labourers were controlled and also discussed cultural resistance by the labourers.14 Other writers such as Frank Birbalsingh and Bas­ deo Mangru have discussed topics such as the marginalization of Indians in Trinidad and Guyana (British Guiana); the suppressed socio-economic positions of Indians in these territories, especially in the post-colonial period; strikes and disturbances by the labour­ ers on the estates; the ‘hardships’ which the labourers suffered and the extent to which they existed in depressed conditions.15 The impact of labourers’ resistance on the actual labour system and in the process leading towards the final abolition of the scheme is missing from the historiography on resistance. Sadly, the historiography on the abolition of the labour system is limited to a few studies or based on specific territories. Hugh Tinker in A New System of Slavery, analyses the manner in which the system was questioned but at the same time has overlooked the impact of the labourers themselves in questioning the system as well as the movement towards abolition in Fiji, Mauritius and the British West Indies.16 Tinker looked at the high politics of aboli­ tion – by the Indian nationalists and British officials and interest groups. While this research provides a comprehensive study of agitation in India, it deals mainly with the manner in which the system was questioned by colonial officers in India and only briefly mentions the movements which developed at a district level. K.O. Laurence in A Question of Labour, briefly discusses the end of the system with emphasis on the role of the planter class as well as the British Imperial Government. Laurence noted that ‘it was in India itself that a movement was to arise which would grow pow­ erful enough to force the abolition of indentured immigration’.17 Laurence dealt mainly with Gopal Krishna Gokhale and the ‘high

24

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

politics’ of the Indian National Congress as well as the responses to the reports on Indian emigration. John D. Kelly’s A Politics of Virtue: Hinduism, Sexuality, and Countercolonial Discourse in Fiji examines the manner in which sexual abuse of Indian women in Fiji became an important part of the discourse on the abolition of the system. K.L. Gillion’s Fiji’s Indian Migrants: A History to the End of Indenture in 1920, discusses some of the main issues that were incorporated in the abolition campaign and focuses on changes in Fiji.18 Karen Ray discussed the final stages of the abolition process and tried to determine who should take the credit for the end of the system in The Abolition of Indentured Emigration 1916-17: The Race for the Spoils.19 It is important to note however, that the historiography of Indian indentured labour/the indentureship system is neither static nor dwindling. Over the past decade there have been new trends in the historiography and a proliferation of publications on Indian indentureship/Indian diaspora. There has been both new research and new information with a focus on comparative studies; Indian women and more gender-oriented studies as well as research that attempt to give a voice to the subalterns and give agency to the labourers themselves. There is a tendency towards more emotional accounts of indentureship as researchers/historians move away from the colonial written sources to other sources such as oral history, interviews with survivors and descendants of indentured labourers. An even more positive step forward would be the focus on comparative studies and studies that seek to clinically examine the combined experiences of the labourers from various territories in its totality rather than as individualized studies. There is also a need to focus on the ones who have been overlooked in historical writings such as children and the poor and destitute labourers. NOTES 1. Munshi Rahman Khan, An Autobiography of an Indian Indentured Labourer (1874-1972), Delhi: Shipra Publications, 2005, p. 73. 2. C. Banks, Annual Report on Emigration from the Port of Calcutta to British and Foreign Colonies, Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press, 1898, p. 2.

Introduction

25

3. CD. 5192, ‘Report of the Committee on Emigration from India to the Crown Colonies and Protectorates.’ Great Britain, 1910. West Indian and Special Collections Division, UWI Main Library, St. Augustine. 4. CO 571/5, ‘Amendment to Defence of India Consolidation Rules 1915; Insertion of New Rule 16-B’, Immigration 1917. Telegram from India, Commerce (Delhi) to Bengal, Financial (Calcutta), 13 March 1917. Labour was explained as ‘unskilled labour.’ 5. David Northrup, Indentured Labour in the Age of Imperialism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995; Sabyasachi Bhatta­ charya, ‘Labour Forms and International Labour Flows in the Context of North-South Relationships: An Overview’, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, 2002; Eric John Hobsbawm, The Age of Empire 1875-1914, New York: Vintage Books, 1989; and idem, The Age of Capital 1848-1875, London: Cardinal, 1988. 6. See David Northrup, Indentured Labour in the Age of Imperialism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. 7 See, for example: David Dabydeen and Brinsley Samaroo, India in the Caribbean, London: Hansib Publishing, 1987; John La Guerre (ed.), Calcutta to Caroni: The East Indians of Trinidad, 2nd edn., St. Augustine: UWI Department of Extra Mural Studies, 1985; Marianne Ramesar, Survivors of Another Crossing, St. Augustine: UWI School of Continuing Studies, 1994; Frank Birbalsingh, IndoCaribbean Resistance, Toronto: Tsar Publications, 1993; Basdeo Mangru, Indians in Guyana: A Concise History from their Arrival to the Present, Chicago: Adams Press, 1999; Kelvin Singh, Bloodstained Tombs: The Muharram Massacre 1884, London: Macmillan Carib­ bean, 1988; Patricia Mohammed, Gender Negotiations Among Indians in Trinidad, 1917-1947, New York: Palgrave, 2002; Clem Seecharan, Joseph Ruhomon’s India: The Progress of Her People at Home and Abroad, and How Those in British Guiana May Improve Themselves, Kingston: University of the West Indies Press, 2001; and idem, Bechu: ‘Bound Coolie’ Radical in British Guiana 1894­ 1901, Kingston: University of the West Indies Press, 1999. This is just a small sample of the historical literature available on Indian indentured labourers in the Caribbean. 8. John D. Kelly, A Politics of Virtue: Hinduism, Sexuality and Countercolonial Discourse in Fiji, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1991; and K.L. Gillion, Fiji’s Indian Migrants: A History to the End of Indenture in 1920, Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1962.

26

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

9. Voices from Indenture: Experiences of Indian Migrants in the British Empire, Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1996; Servants, Sirdars and Settlers: Indians in Mauritius, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995; and Lakshmi’s Legacy: Testimonies of Indian Women in 19th Century Mauritius, Editions Ocean Indien, 1994. 10. G.H. Calpin, Indians in South Africa, Pietermaritzburg: Shuter & Shooter, 1949; P.S. Joshi, The Tyranny of Colour: A Study of the Indian Problem in South Africa, Durban: E.P. & Commercial Printing Company, 1942; and Fatima Meer, Portrait of Indian South Africans, Durban: Avon House, 1969. 11. Munshi Rahman Khan, Autobiography of An Indian Indentured Labourer (1874-1972): Jeevan Prakash, trans. Kathinka SinhaKerkhoff, Ellen Bal and Alok Deo Singh, Delhi: Shipra Publications, 2005. 12. Maurits Hassankhan et al., Legacy of Slavery and Indentured Labour: Historical and Contemporary Issues, Delhi: Manohar, 2016 and idem, Social and Cultural Dimensions of Indian Indentured Labour and its Diaspora, Delhi: Manohar, 2016. 13. Lomarsh Roopnarine, ‘Indo-Caribbean Indenture: Creating Opport­ unities out of Adversity’, Ph D diss., State University of New York, 2002. 14. See Kusha Haraksingh, ‘Control and Resistance Among Overseas Indian Workers: A Study of Labour on the Sugar Plantations of Trinidad 1875-1917’, East Indians in the Caribbean: A Symposium on Contemporary Economic and Political Issues, University of the West Indies Press, pp. 16-23, September 1979. See also, Lomarsh Roopnarine, Indo-Caribbean Resistance and Accommodation, 1838­ 1920, St. Augustine: University of the West Indies Press, 2009. 15. See Frank Birbalsingh, Indo-Caribbean Resistance, Toronto: Tsar Publications, 1993, and Basdeo Mangru, Indians in Guyana: A Concise History from their Arrival to the Present, Chicago: Adams Press, 1999. 16. Hugh Tinker, A New System of Slavery, London: Hansib Publishing, 1993. 17. K.O. Laurence, A Question of Labour: Indentured Immigration into Trinidad and British Guiana 1875-1917, Kingston: Ian Randle Publishers, 1994, p. 454. 18. John D. Kelly, A Politics of Virtue: Hinduism, Sexuality and Countercolonial Discourse in Fiji, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,

Introduction

27

1991; and K.L. Gillion, Fiji’s Indian Migrants: A History to the End of Indenture in 1920, Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1962. 19. Karen A. Ray, ‘The Abolition of Indentured Emigration 1916-1917: The Race for the Spoils’, paper presented at ISER–NCIC Conference on Challenge and Change: The Indian Diaspora in its Historical and Contemporary Contexts, The University of the West Indies, Trinidad, August 1995.

CHAPTER 1

Indian Indentureship in Context

It is notorious that these districts are the great recruiting grounds for cooly emigration to all parts of Bengal and Assam, to the West Indian islands and Mauritius; and though it is asserted that in some parts of the Division emigration has not of late been so extensive as it was in the ten years preceding the Census of 1872, yet that it still constitutes a considerable drain on the population….1

The Indian indentureship system was a global labour scheme that involved five continents, about fifteen countries and was spread throughout the British, Dutch and French empires. This system of mass migration did not entail a mere transportation of labourers; it also encompassed the transfer of cultures; the development of a global network of shipping; the transfer of Indian indigenous crafts and industries and the introduction of new forms of medicines and medical care. From 1838, when the first batch of labourers left India for Mauritius and British Guiana, until 1917 when the last shiploads of emigrants were transported to various territories all over the world, approximately two million Indian labourers had left their villages and districts in India. These labourers changed the intrinsic nature of the territories where they migrated and/or settled through their economic, political and socio-cultural con­ tributions. Migration was not an uncommon activity amongst the Indian population. Internal migration in times of or immediately fol­ lowing droughts, famines, flooding and various natural disasters took place on a regular basis. India was a predominantly agrarian society and once agriculture was affected, the labourers sought alternative methods of survival through migration to the larger

Indian Indentureship in Context

29

towns and cities. In fact, the labour for the tea plantations of Assam was supplied internally by Indian migrants. Thus, migration to British, Dutch and French colonies from 1838 onwards may have simply been an extension of the movement of an already mobile labour force. While the movement outside of India was new, the actual notion of moving in times of difficulties was not a novel one. Consequently, external migration under the India indentureship system existed for 79 years (with some variations according to the specific territory) and the approximate number of labourers that emigrated are as shown in Table 1. The official records of the Indian migrant population show dis­ cernible trends in the migration population in terms of economic background, caste and location. British imperialist policies acted table 1: number and duration of indian labourers who emi­ grated from india to various territories under the indian indentureship system Territory Mauritius

Duration of Migration

1834-1924 (not continu­ ous years ) Natal (South Africa) 1860-1911 British Guiana 1838-1917 Reunion Island 1829-1924 Jamaica 1845-1917 Belize 1870-90 Trinidad and Tobago 1845-1917 St. Vincent 1861-80 St. Lucia 1856-65 and 1878-93 Grenada 1857-85 Martinique 1853-88 Guadeloupe 1853-88 Suriname 1873-1916 Fiji 1879-1917 St. Kitts 1861 French Guiana 1853-88 St. Croix 1863-8

Total Number of Labourers 453,000 152,189 238,909 4,579 37,027 3,000 147,500 2,472 7,627 3,200 25,732 42,408 34,404 60,695 337 8,199 300

Source: Proceedings of the Government of Bengal. Revenue and Agriculture, Emigration Branch, National Archives of India, New Delhi.

30

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

as the catalyst for the mass movement of Indian labourers, both within and outside of India. This chapter examines the historical background of the emigration of Indian indentured labourers with a focus on areas of origin of the labourers and the socio-economic conditions which existed in these areas and which influenced or contributed to emigration.2 It shows the extent to which British imperialist policies impacted on the Indian labour population and examines why the indentureship scheme was a viable option for Indian labourers. It gives a more microscopic view of emigration from the villages and districts of India within the general con­ text of British economic imperialism. A cheap source of labour was valuable within the imperialist framework, especially if this labour could be transported from one part of the British Empire to another. As British colonial rule in India led to the intensification of poverty, Indian labourers from the regions affected by British economic exploitation sought alternative methods of earning an income and consequently, some made the decision to emigrate within India and to foreign colonies, as contracted labourers.

A Macro Perspective Imperialism created the conditions which facilitated the migra­ tion of labourers at both a macro and micro level. One a macro level, there are the arguments which have been put forward by economic historians on the general impact of British imperialism in India. Debates on the rise of poverty, the impact of increase in taxations, the proliferation of the landless peasantry, the effects of commercialization of the rural economy and their links to migra­ tion are not new in the historiography of the economic history of India. Studies on this subject centre on the consequences of British imperialism and whether or not it was baneful, benign or benefi­ cent.3 Four main perspectives (and variants of these) have been projected on the general subject of British rule in India. One view states that British rule led to an increase in the standard of living in India. Another expressed the opinion that there were fundamental deficiencies in the Indian environment which British efforts could not overcome. The others claim that British rule led to an increase

Indian Indentureship in Context

31

in poverty in India and that the Indian economy was altered under British rule, thereby preventing development.4 The first argument put forward is that of the drain of India’s wealth. In the 1860s Dadabhai Naoroji pointed out that the Brit­ ish extracted wealth ‘as the price of her rule in India’ and noted that out of the revenue raised in India, almost one quarter went directly out of the country and was added to England’s coffers so that India was ‘being continuously bled’.5 This idea was taken up by Karl Marx in 1881 in which he mentioned the ‘bleeding process’ to which India was subjected under imperial rule.6 Marx was refer­ ring to the ‘drain of wealth’, a term coined to explain the ‘unilateral transfer of social surplus or potential investible capital to Britain by the colonial state, its officials, foreign merchants and other capi­ talists through unrequited exports’.7 India received no equivalent economic, commercial or material returns in any form, either in the present or in the future.8 While there is no denying the fact regarding the concept of drain, there are deviations on the esti­ mates of the actual extent of this drain. The father of the concept, Naoroji was one of the first to attempt to estimate the actual extent of the drain and he calculated that in 1870 it was approximately £12 million. From 1870 to 1872, there was an average drain of £27.4 million per year and in 1905, it had increased to £34 mil­ lion.9 The figure for the end of the nineteenth century has varied from £20 to £30 million a year. R.C. Dutt noted that the drain was almost half of India’s national income while Irfan Habib calculated that it was almost 9 per cent of the national income from 1783 to 1792 and 4.41 per cent in 1880.10 Prior to 1858, the ‘drain’ of India’s wealth occurred in the form of tributes or direct transfer of resources11 but after this time it was visible in a number of ways. First, it was evident in the excess of exports over imports. From 1757 to 1780, there was a drain of £38 million in unrequited exports from Bengal.12 A.K. Bagchi has classified the period 1813 to 1834 as the second phase of Brit­ ish exploitation, during which Britain was able to ‘drain’ India through a system of free trade.13 There was an unfavourable bal­ ance of trade between India and Britain and an ‘enormous transfer of wealth’ from India. Habib calculated that Britain gained over

32

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

£2 million in 1789 to 1790 and this amount increased to about £4.70 million by 1801.14 Second, the ‘drain’ was seen in Britain’s expenditure charges of the Government of India. This was the expenditure incurred in Britain by the Secretary of State for India on behalf of the Govern­ ment of India. It comprised payments of interest on the Indian public debt; civil and military charges paid in England on account of India; this included the cost of the Secretary of State’s estab­ lishment at the India Office and the payment of pensions and allowances to European officials of the Government of India. From 1877/8 to 1892/3 the home charges were estimated at 194.9 million rupees or 26 per cent of the average gross revenue of the Govern­ ment of India. The home charges increased by 62 per cent during this period.15 Third, the drain was facilitated via the profits of private foreign capital invested in trade and industries in India. Naoroji calculated that in 1870 approximately £12 million was taken out of India in the ways mentioned above. From 1870/2, there was an average drain of £27.4 million per year and in 1905, it had increased to £34 million.16 This meant that there was a reduction of national product for internal distribution and expenditure inside India. The result of this was a decrease in employment, as income was not being generated inside the country. Fourth, it occurred in the form of remittances to Britain by British officials, professionals and businessmen in India. It was visible with the employment of Euro­ peans in the Indian administration, army and railways whereby a percentage of their salaries, incomes and savings were remitted to England. Bipan Chandra noted that in 1892 Europeans appro­ priated approximately 30 per cent of the total net revenue of the Government of India, in the form of salaries and pensions.17 Irfan Habib has noted that from 1783/4 to 1792/3 private remittance by Europeans was about £1.78 million.18 The drain represented a loss of productive capital and it had an adverse effect on employment and income. According to Habib, ‘such a continuous loss of savings would be crippling for any econ­ omy. Where would the investments come from to stimulate any expansion of the economy when the bulk of the possible savings

Indian Indentureship in Context

33

was annually lost?’19 When the Indian economy was subordi­ nated in this manner, it left little or no room for India’s economic development. The drain exacerbated the tendency toward uneven development20 and it slowed down the rate of growth of India’s economy. Second, there is the idea that British imperialism led to dein­ dustrialization in India and thus, changes in India’s position as a producer of manufactured products. Paul Bairoch calculated that in 1750 India had supplied approximately one quarter of the world’s total output but in 1880 India supplied only 2.8 per cent of the total output and this figure was further decreased to 1.4 per cent by 1913.21 Amitava K. Dutt put this idea across quite coher­ ently when he stated, When the British began their colonization, India was an exporter of industrial goods and an importer of primary and intermediate goods. Before 1800, India was the major supplier of cotton and silk textiles (fine cloth as well as everyday wear for the masses) in international markets, including Europe; Indian textiles were considerably cheaper than British woolen because of India’s lower wages and technical advantage.22

By the early 1800s the composition of exports changed towards non-manufactured goods while there was the importation of manufactured goods into India, notably the penetration of British textiles in the Indian market. India became an importer of manu­ factures such as cotton yarns and cloth, metals and machinery. According to Tirthankar Roy, ‘at first, an export market for Indian cloth disappeared. Later, handspun cotton yarn and handwoven cloth suffered due to import of yarn and cloth from the mills in England.’23 Amiya Kumar Bagchi concluded that instead of devel­ oping industries to the point where India could have sustained her population, India was now importing specific goods to cater for the markets generated within India. For example, instead of produc­ ing sufficient cotton for home use and for export to Britain, India was now importing cotton. By the early decades of the nineteenthcentury India was importing almost 40 per cent of its cotton from Britain. From 1886 to 1887 Britain exported £67 million worth of cotton goods; £28 million of this amount was exported to India.24

34

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

There was a correlating decline of traditional Indian industries as the rise in alternative supplies of certain raw materials and manufactured goods led to the ruin of rural and urban manufac turers. The idea has also been expressed that the importation of industrial products was too rapid to allow the traditional industries to adjust, much less to expand.25 Bagchi calculated that the indus trial segment of the population of Bihar decreased from 18.6 per cent in 1809 to 8.5 per cent in 1899.26 He noted that there was a decline in the population of weavers and spinners in part of Bihar from 62.3 per cent in 1809-13 to 15.1 per cent in 1901.27 Deindustrialization in India was also attributed to the colo­ nial government’s lack of protection of Indian industries from the influx of low-cost goods which invaded the Indian market; the higher duties on Indian goods in Britain, competition from Lancashire textile industries (all duties on imports into India were abolished in 1879 and 1882 due to pressure from the Lancashire industrialists)28 and what has been referred to as ‘judicious inter­ vention that is non-intervention except where British interests were involved’.29 Dutt noted that ‘deindustrialization considerably reduced the chances that the Indian economy could experience industrial development based on its handicraft industry’.30 There was a decline on the proportion of the population dependent on secondary industry. Bagchi calculated that the total industrial population fell from 62.3 per cent in 1809-13 to 15.1 per cent in 1901.31 Consequently, the percentage of the population directly dependent on agriculture increased as a proportion of the Indian population had to turn to agricultural labour or small cultivation to either supplement their diminishing incomes or to earn an income.32 Third, there is the entire debate on Agriculture and Land Rev­ enue Administration. Changes in agriculture and land revenue administration had serious implications for the labouring popula­ tion in India and the mobility of the labour force. According to Tirthankar Roy, The latter half of the nineteenth century saw agrarian commercialization driven by translocal markets…. Agricultural prices consistently rose.

Indian Indentureship in Context

35

Transaction costs fell. Land sales, land prices and rents increased. Credit transactions expanded. Labour became more mobile and more market oriented, and millions went overseas.33

It is no coincidence that the bulk of the migrating population (both within India and to overseas colonies) came from the areas of India where land revenue appropriation was permanently fixed by 1800; Bengal, Bihar, Orissa and parts of Madras.34 In these areas there was an increase in revenue; the revenue was collected by intermediaries (zamindari/ryotwari/mahalwari systems); payment was to be made in cash as opposed to kind and the rate of assess­ ment increased progressively. The revenue collected increased annually regardless of the level of prices or the state of the weather so that more pressure was placed on those involved in agriculture/ agriculturally-related activities. Rajat Ray and Ratna Ray note that in one part of Bengal, ‘it was calculated in 1873 that the price of staple crops had risen by more than 100 per cent in the last 20 years’.35 In the Bardwan (Burdwan) district of Bengal, from 1793 to the 1850s, the rates of assessment had increased almost three times and by the 1870s it had increased almost four or five times.36 Also, agriculture became more commercialized. There was the transfer of land for non-food crops and the introduction of a money-oriented economy. Sabyasachi Bhattacharya has discussed the introduction of cash crops such as jute, opium, indigo, tea and sugar cane in eastern India and noted that the introduction of cash crop did not stimulate the ‘traditional agriculture’ as the European entrepreneurs ‘did very little towards improving the efficiency of the traditional system of agriculture’.37 P.J. Marshall has shown that the East India Company had ‘brought many of Bengal’s resources under its direct control. Saltpetre produced in Bengal and Bihar had been a Company monopoly since 1758 and opium since 1773.’ As a result weavers were displaced or became indebted to the Company.38 The commercialization of agriculture encouraged the dominance of the jotedars; a class of rich tenants and the domi­ nant village landholders. Francis Buchanan-Hamilton calculated that in 1808 in the Dinajpur district of Bengal 52.1 per cent of the agricultural workforce did not own any land and worked for rich

36

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

tenant-landlords as either sharecroppers or agricultural labour­ ers.39 These poor farmers and sharecroppers sold their produce ‘immediately after harvest, when the ruling prices of grain were lowest during the year, to the local grain-dealer (bepari), who was often the jotedar.’40 The jotedars had the resources to store the pro­ duce and sell when prices were high, normally in the middle of the cultivating season. The profits of the poor farmers decreased while the jotedars became more financially entrenched in the villages. There were also changes in land ownership which resulted in a restructuring of class hierarchies. In 1793, the British conferred proprietary rights to the zamindars. The Permanent Settlement of Bengal did not distinguish between the various grades of heredi­ tary revenue-collectors or the dominant landed village groups.41 The change in the land revenue system gave a few zamindars the right to collect revenue and also special powers over the actual cultivators. The majority of the peasants were now degraded to the status of tenants. Roy noted, The British wanted to create a class of cultivators with secure property rights who would yield more revenue to them by pursuing profit-oriented cultivation. However, property rights often went to noncultivating classes due to mistaken identity, imperfect information or political compulsions. The legal recognition of a property right, conditional on payment of land revenue, went along with the erosion of many customary rights over usage of land or what it produced.42

When landlords increased the revenue on the land, agricul­ tural labourers were at a greater risk of losing their lands. Hence, it was more possible for landlords to gain control over the land and when this happened land became an alienable commodity for most of the peasants. According to Roy in 1901, approximately 68 per cent of India’s population was involved in agriculture and allied occupations.43 The changes in agriculture and land revenue administration therefore impacted on a substantial proportion of the Indian population. The effects of these changes were numerous and far-reaching: the rise of the landlords and moneylenders cre­ ated new socio-economic hierarchical structures, the occurrences of indebtedness increased and the incidence of impoverishment increased and was further exacerbated by drought and famines.

Indian Indentureship in Context

37

Some agricultural workers saw the need to supplement their incomes and sought other forms of employment so that seasonal migration to the towns/cities was an option for some while others may have considered the option of emigrating to other colonies.

Imperialism at a Micro Level An investigation of British imperialist policies at a micro level, within the districts and villages, shows that these policies did indeed translate into an intensification of poverty which then influenced a direct and urgent need to find alternative employ­ ment. It is within this context of imperialist policies and economic degeneration that overseas migration can be located. On a general level, there are similar trends for most of the labour-importing col­ onies as the specific districts which served as recruiting grounds were the ones which were more severely affected by imperialist policies (Table 2). The majority of the labourers who emigrated to the various labour-importing territories came from the different districts of Bengal, Bihar, the North-West Provinces and Oudh (Figure 1). In fact, there was greater tendency for labourers from the United table 2: districts of emigration of indian indentured labourers 1890-1900 Year 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900

Bengal 2,253 2,047 2, 126 2,520 2,508 1,115 1,022 1,113 543 731 433

Bihar 4,393 3,347 3,012 2,162 3,712 1,979 1,997 1,331 660 1,585 2,103

North-West Provinces 12,485 15,208 9,212 7,463 14, 167 10,221 9,576 6,902 5,134 7,630 10,156

Oudh 3,947 5,011 2,875 2,901 6,320 4,000 3,844 2,969 2,997 4,105 4,870

Source: Proceedings of the Government of India. Revenue and Agriculture Department,

Emigration Branch, 1881-1905. National Archives of India, New Delhi.

38

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Source: Proceedings of the Government of India. Revenue and Agriculture Department, Emigration Branch, 1881-1905. National Archives of India, New Delhi.

Figure 1: Number of Labourers Emigrating from India

Provinces and Bengal to emigrate than from any other areas. John M. Geogheghan noted that for the period 1845 to 1870, It appears that the province of Behar has contributed nearly one-half of the Calcutta emigrants; the North-Western Provinces and Oudh come next (for the number from Central India is very small indeed), and West­ ern Bengal stands third. The quotas from other provinces are very small.44

When an even more clinical analysis is done, it is obvious that the provinces were consistent in their contribution towards the emigration of labourers but the individual districts and towns var­ ied throughout the period. The labourers who were recruited from the United Province of Agra and Oudh originated in the following sub-localities (Table 3). Those who came from Bengal and later the province of Bihar were mainly from the following districts and towns (Table 4).45 While there was a tendency for labourers from these districts to emigrate, the flow of emigrants was not always consistent and fluctuations of varying degrees can be seen for some of the dis­ tricts. For example, Figure 2 shows the fluctuations in the number of labourers who emigrated from five sub-districts in India, for the period 1881 to 1917. There were higher cases of emigration from these five sub-districts than for other sub-districts in India. How then does this relate to the wider British imperial policies? In order to understand how British imperial policies seeped down

Indian Indentureship in Context

39

table 3: districts of emigration, 1877 to 191246 Province

Districts

United Province

t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t


Oudh

"MMBIBCBE .JS[BQVS #FOBSFT (PSBLIQVS .FFSVU $BXOQPSF #BSFJMMZ "HSB +IBOTJ
-VDLOPX 4JUBQVS 'Z[BCBE 3BJ
#BSFMJ

table 4: districts of emigration, 1877 to 191247 Province

Districts

Bihar

t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t


Bengal

1BUOB (BZB 4BSBO 5JSIPPU .POHIZS #IBHBMQVS 4IBIBCBE $IBNQBSBO $BMDVUUB 1FSHVOOBIT )PXSBI $IPUB
/BHQVS #VSEXBO /BHQVS $PPDI 4POUBM
1FSHVOOBIT

to the level of the districts and villages, it is necessary to assess the correlation between the socio-economic situation in the provinces on the whole, and in the districts/towns specifically, and the emi­ gration of labourers from these areas. Complete credence cannot

40

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Figure 2: Fluctuations in the number of labourers who emigrated from five sub-districts for the period 1881 to 191748

be given to the persuasive powers of the recruiters as employment opportunities in the colonies would only be grasped by individuals who were looking for a source of income or an alternative to their existing circumstances. At the same time, while it is true that some labourers were coerced into emigrating, it is difficult to quantify this proportion. Also, some labourers made conscious decisions to work as contract labourers in the colonies. Admittedly, there were exceptions to the situation but the dominant trends were certainly apparent. There was in fact a correlation between famines in the United Provinces, Bengal and Bihar and attempts to register for the indentureship system in Trinidad, Jamaica and British Guiana. The number of Indians who registered for the scheme increased immediately after some of the major famines in the districts of the United Provinces, Bengal and Bihar. For the indenture season 1864/5, the number of labourers registered was 6,189 but in the next year when famines were evident in Bengal, Bihar and Orissa the figure increased by 31 per cent, to 19,963. The increase was again seen in the 1877/8 period. For the indenture season preced­ ing this (1876/7), a total of 7,734 Indians registered for the scheme.

Indian Indentureship in Context

41

For the 1877/8 season the number of labourers registered to leave for Trinidad increased to 18,488 due to famines in the North West­ ern Provinces and Oudh.49 The connection becomes even clearer when the districts/ towns are examined. In the case of Trinidad, for example, there was an increase in the number of Indians who attempted to register for the emigration system during and after the famine in the districts of Saran, Patna, and Shahabad in the Bihar province. When spe­ cific areas were affected by famine, the number of recruits from those areas increased. It must be noted though, the high number of labourers who registered for the system did not necessarily cor­ respond with an increase in the number actually departing to the colony, given the fact that only the quota requested by the plant­ ers in the colonies was fulfilled; the number of journeys did not increase and there was a limit to the total number of emigrants on board the ships. Added to this, poor economic conditions meant that there was a substantial increase in the number of recruits rejected as medically unfit at both the sub-depot and the main depot in Calcutta. From 1883/4, rainfall in the Bengal presidency was insufficient and unevenly distributed. As a result, the recorded output of the crops was generally below average. The winter rice crop failed in the districts of Patna, particularly Gaya, Darbhanga, Nuddea, Bogra and Murshidabad.50 In 1884, 282 emigrants came from the sub-districts of Patna (this made up 15.4 per cent of the total num­ ber going to Trinidad that year). A total of 461 Indians registered for the indentureship system that year but none came from Saran and Shahabad.51 The Secretary of State noted that ‘the failure of crops and consequent distress were happily confined to a nar­ row tract in Behar…’. 52 and this area did not include Saran and Shahabad. From 1896 to 1897, there were problems with the harvest once again, as farmers experienced extensive failure of crops. Com­ bined with increase in prices, this caused severe economic distress throughout the Bengal province.53 In 1897 a total of 826 Indians who registered for the indentureship scheme in the Bihar prov­ ince, came from the districts of Patna, Saran and Shahabad. Of this

42

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

figure 73 per cent was from Shahabad, 20 per cent from Patna and 7 per cent from Saran.54 More than half of the total number, who registered for the indentureship system, emigrated to the colony, that is 463 labourers or 56 per cent. Of this number, 84 belonged to Saran but were registered in areas outside of the province. This shows that the labourers from Saran had already migrated to other areas in eastern India, and were registered for the indentureship scheme in those provinces/districts. This outflow of labourers was a regular feature of the rural economy in the districts of the United Provinces, Bengal and Bihar. Yang has noted that internal migration in India did not always mean rural/urban migration but often took the form of rural/rural migration and that ‘there has always been movement in response to better opportunities’.55 From 1870 to 1900, approximately 725,000 labourers migrated to the tea plantations in Assam from various parts of India, and from 1891 to 1901 more than 700,000 went to other parts of India.56 In 1881, James Austin Bourdillon, the Inspector General of Registration for Bengal observed, ‘…of the Patna emigrants 67,529 are in the other districts of the Divi­ sion, … 37,043 are found in the Monghyr division; so that only 43,359 persons, which is equivalent to 30.25 per cent of the emi­ grants and to 2.6 per cent of the natives of the district, have gone beyond the boundaries of Bihar. Calcutta and its suburbs account for nearly 23,000 of these and the remainder are distributed, all over the province.’57 It is important to know that there was a well-established trad­ ition of movement of labourers within India, to both urban and rural areas in search of better opportunities. In most cases, the actual districts/towns which were prone to internal migration were those from which indentured labourers originated. In 1891, Bourdillon noted that the districts of Shahabad, Muzaffarpur, Patna and Champaran in Bihar as well as Gorakhpur, Azamgarh and Ballia in the United Provinces were prone to outmigration.58 Also, the outmigration of labourers was of a seasonal nature. The need to find alternative sources of income was influenced by cli­ matic conditions so that periods of flooding or drought resulted in migration.

Indian Indentureship in Context

43

Under an even more clinical examination of the districts of the United Provinces, Bengal and Bihar, factors such as popula­ tion density, the industrial sector (or lack of) and the caste system explain why the indentured labourers came from these areas in particular. First, the vulnerability of the rural population to adverse climatic conditions (which would explain the high num­ ber of Indians who attempted to emigrate in the years immediately following famines as discussed above) can be understood in the context of ‘agricultural dependency’. Henry Beverley, the Inspector General of Registration in Bengal noted, ‘The vast population of Bengal is of an essentially rural character … it is certainly within the mark to assert that at least two-thirds of the people of Bengal belong to what are called the agricultural classes. Agriculture is, indeed the principal occupation of the province, – the raising of food grains and other produce, either for home use or for exporta­ tion.’59 According to the occupational structure for the districts of Bihar, by 1881, 58 per cent of the population was employed in agriculture and 22 per cent was listed as having no definite gainful employment. Only 2 per cent was employed as professionals, 5 per cent as servants or attendants, 4 per cent was involved in com­ merce or trade and 9 per cent in manufacturing industries. 60 Table 5 shows occupational status of the male population (over ten years of age) of three areas in the district of Bihar. Dependency on agriculture placed a large proportion of the population (in susceptible areas) at the mercy of climatic condi­ tions and shows the lack of employment options which could table 5: occupations of indians in three districts of bihar, 1881 Occupation Professional Class Domestic Class Commercial Class Agricultural Class Manufacturing/Industry Non-productive

Patna (%) 1 3 2 15 5 23

Source: District Census Report, 1881, Bengal.

Shahabad (%) 1 2 2 18 5 28

Saran (%) 1 1 2 23 3 23

44

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

provide support in times of agricultural crises. The commercial­ ization of agriculture was visible in Bengal by the 1800s – opium was grown in Bihar and jute was cultivated throughout eastern Bengal. At the same time the industrial sectors had not developed to accommodate a high number of workers. Beverley observed, There are few manufactures of any importance in Bengal. The invention of machinery and the appliances of steam in Europe have ruined what once formed the staple manufacture of the province and the bulk of the East India’s Company annual investment. Instead of the Dacca muslins now finding their way to Europe, Bengal is one of the best foreign mar­ kets for our English piece-goods, … it is not surprising therefore, that we find the art of weaving employing a much smaller proportion of the population than formerly…. The number of manufacturers and artisans does not exceed 11 per cent of the population.61

In addition, the majority of the labouring population was not sufficiently qualified to engage in the professional sectors. W.W. Hunter noted that the education of the agricultural classes was underdeveloped in India and the ‘vast majority of the agricultural­ ists in India are illiterate’.62 In 1881, there was an average illiteracy rate of 94 per cent in Bengal and the rate was even higher for females as a total of 9,972 out of every 10,000 females were illiter­ ate.63 The relatively high population of the districts of Bengal, Bihar and the United Provinces meant that the resources in these areas were insufficient to sustain the population and this only aggra­ vated the conditions of the agricultural population. In the 1870s in Bengal there was an average of 650 souls per square mile. In some of the districts of origin the density was above average with 700 in Tirhoot, 740 in Patna and 780 in Saran.64 In the 1890s in the United Provinces, the average density was 600 souls per square mile with 522 in Oudh as opposed to a density of 160 in the Central Prov­ inces for example, an area not highly prone to migration and from where a minority of the indentured labourers originated.65 Yang has given the example of Saran, a district prone to recruitment because of its high population density and the low socio-economic status of its inhabitants. According to Yang,

Indian Indentureship in Context

45

In the five decennial censuses from 1881 to 1921 it returned 870, 930, 898, 853, and 872 persons per square mile. Furthermore, within the dis­ trict, the southern thanas from which outmigration was the heaviest were not only more crowded but also paid higher rent rates than the relatively non-migrating northern areas, and this was especially so for the less privileged cultivators. Moreover, by the late nineteenth century there was no proportionate growth in agriculture to alleviate the increasing pres­ sure of numbers on the land.66

It was estimated in 1903 that only 64 per cent of the popula­ tion of Saran ‘Ranged above the minimum subsistence level of 2.5 acres for a family of five. Far below this standard were the “culti­ vating and landless labourers” consisting in equal proportion of people whose holdings did not amount to 2.5 acres or who did not have any land at all.’67 S.H. Fremantle noted that by the twentiethcentury Saran was the first district of Bihar to reach the point where it was no longer able to support its ‘population in moderate comfort from the produce of the soil’.68 An examination of caste groups also shows the impact of imperialism. On the one hand the notion that ‘migrants will be disproportionately drawn from among the segments of the rural population which occupy the least favoured structural positions’69 is evident by the fact that 90 per cent of the labourers who went to Trinidad for example, belonged to the ‘agricultural’ castes.70 On the other hand, it is not unusual that the emigrants included indi­ viduals from the higher castes as the caste divisions in various districts did not always correlate with a clear distinction in occu­ pation as seen with the Brahmins for example. In the example of Trinidad, Brahmins comprised an average of 15 per cent of the total emigrant population.71 The Brahmin caste comprised numerous sub-castes. Some of these sub-castes were not gainfully employed in religious activities but earned a livelihood from the land and were also vulnerable to changes in the rural economy. However, although a proportion of the Brahmins were involved in agricul­ ture and were susceptible to structural changes like the rest of the agricultural population, they were faced with more severe caste restrictions (loss of caste) regarding emigration to foreign lands. For this reason a relatively small per cent emigrated to Trinidad.

46

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

All the above factors combined to make the agricultural popu­ lation of the United Provinces, Bengal and Bihar a vulnerable, mobile one. Changes in the rural/agricultural economy along with government policies aggravated the economic conditions of the population of these areas. Amartya Sen’s idea that a lack of income can exacerbate famines can be applicable here as the agricultural population of these areas suffered from severe loss of income because of the structural changes brought about by British rule in India.72 While climatic conditions contribute to impoverishment and famines, ‘government policy sets the stage for all famines. If proper policies are in place, natural disaster need not evolve into famine’.73 When government policies are geared towards the eco­ nomic benefit of all classes as opposed to certain classes as was the case with colonial rule in India, impoverishment, rigid class stratification and the tendency to migrate might be curbed. Indeed, this hypothesis is further supported by the testimonials of some of the labourers who emigrated from their districts and villages. One migrant, Munshi Rahman Khan, stated, While I was standing on the bridge of the canal and looking at the water, two Muslims, who later proved to be money-minded devils, came to me…. ‘We would like you to have a job?’ I said, ‘What kind of job? They said it is a government job…. They happily told me. ‘Then you could become a saradara (headman) and receive a salary of 12 Annas per day. The work has to do with sugar…Hearing such tempting words I became very happy … I thought that these people were rightly telling all these things for my welfare, as a salary of 12 Annas per day becomes 24 Rupees a month in India. To get such a high salary at that time [in India] was very difficult.74

Another labourer said: I come to wuk for money an go back … dem muslim fellar them fool me bring me to dis country e say e ha plenty money e axe me how much you getting every month i say three rupee

Indian Indentureship in Context

47

e say you chupid over dey sara bara anna rogh every day … everybody glad to come to dis country75

The opportunity to earn 12 annas a day was a strong tempta­ tion to individuals who were earning much less than this in the villages. In Saran for example, in 1903, an ordinary unskilled labourer earned an average of two or three annas per day.76 Thus, the ‘money factor’ or the ability to earn wages played a crucial role in the decision-making process of the labourers. Judith Brown and Rosemary Foot reflecting on Asian migration in general noted that, ‘Economic and demographic factors were significant for many migrants: opportunities thought or known to be avail­ able abroad or elsewhere in the state as opposed to those at home which were seen as limited, stagnant or declining.’77 This explains the relationship between economic depression and emigration and shows the rational economic behaviour of the labourers. The majority of the emigrant population under the Indian indentureship scheme were labourers who were affected by British imperialist policies in one way or the other, who were looking for other employment options. Hence, when approached by the recruiters with all the glorified stories of life in the colonies and life on the plantations many were receptive and consequently registered for the labour scheme.

Conclusion Though economic factors featured predominantly as the reason for migration, it is important to acknowledge that there were always exceptions to what has been discussed so far. In fact, there ZHUHLQVWDQFHVZKHUHWKHGHFLVLRQWRHPLJUDWHZDVLQÀXHQFHGE\ political considerations rather than economic ones as seen with the increase in the number of Indians registering for the indentureship system immediately after the ‘Sepoy Mutiny’ of 1857. The number of individuals who registered for the system in 1858 to 1859 was almost twice that of the number which registered the previous year as some Indians who had been active participants in the Mutiny

48

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Figure 3: Correlation between the ‘Sepoy Mutiny’ and

Recruitment to Trinidad, 1857 to 185978

sought to escape the punitive measures of the Government of India via emigration. Figure 3 shows the extent of this increase for three VSHFL¿FDUHDV6KDKDEDG*D\DDQG*KD]LSXULQWKHSUHVLGHQF\RI Bengal. At the same time, this should not be interpreted as a correspond­ ing increase in the number of emigrants who actually departed from the port of Calcutta as only the quota required by the plant­ ers was filled and registering for the system did not automatically mean one was accepted for it. Additionally, gender issues played a key role in emigration and sometimes overshadowed economic factors in the entire recruit­ ment process. Rational economic behaviour was probably most gender-specific for those Indian women who were widows who left for the colonies. In the case of Trinidad, approximately 15 per cent of all female Indian emigrants to the colony were widows.79 However, this figure correlates to the prevalence of a widow popu­ lation in the districts. For example, in 1881, in the Bihar province, 20 per cent of the female population in the Patna district were widows; 18 per cent in Shahabad and 16 per cent in Saran – as compared to the percentage of widowers; 5 per cent in Patna,

Indian Indentureship in Context

49

4.6 per cent in Shahabad and 4 per cent in Saran.80 Widows repre­ sented one of the most impoverished groups in Indian society and they usually continued living with their in-laws and performed the menial tasks in the home and were most affected in times of famines, increase in prices and so on. However, there were always difficulties in acquiring the required number of female indentured labourers stipulated by law in 1868 (40 females to every 100 males). In keeping with the notion that those individuals who would be most susceptible at times of economic difficulties would be the ones most inclined towards emigration and the fact that the majority of women were economically dependent, then one would expect that women would have constituted a substantial proportion of the total num­ ber of recruits and the actual number who emigrated. This was not the case as socio-cultural constraints placed restrictions on the emigration of women and hindered the rational decision-making process of Indian women. The patriarchal nature of the society placed severe constraints on their movement and independence of Indian women so that they were a socially subjugated group on the whole.81 Often the patriarchical nature of the society and the control exercised over the female migrants extended beyond the homes/villages and was in fact, reflected in colonial policies. In 1879, a government circular stated, ‘In all cases where married women present themselves for registration, especially when they usually reside in another district, it should be ascertained in the best way available whether the husband is alive or dead, and in the former case, whether he has any objection to his wife becoming an emigrant.’82 Cases such as those of Zamiran of Fatehpur village and Lakhia of Paharpur village, two villages in the district of Ghazipur, were common at the sub-depots. Both women were recruited in their respective villages but were not registered at the sub-depot. The Deputy Magistrate, Pt. Mohun Lall noted that in the case of Zami­ ran he had tried to ‘ascertain the willingness of her husband; but as the woman appears to have falsified her residence, as is clear from a local enquiry, I refuse to register her.’83 Regarding Lakhia, he noted that, ‘Orders have been sent to the police to enquire if the

50

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

husband of the woman is alive, and, if he is alive, to ascertain from him whether he is willing to his wife becoming an emigrant. No reply has yet been received’.84 Thus, while British imperialism impacted on everyday eco­ nomic situation in the districts and villages where recruitment was prevalent, societal norms and political factors played a role in influencing the actual migrant population, though to a much lesser extent. The argument can go even further to state that these societal norms and political factors were in fact, the negative results of British imperial policies. NOTES 1. J.A. Bourdillon, Inspector General of Registration, Bengal, Census of India, 1881, Bengal, p. 43. 2. Various historians such as Hugh Tinker has given a detailed examination of the general socio-economic background of the indentured labourers in A New System of Slavery, London: Hansib Publishing Limited, 1993. Also, K.O. Laurence has given a more specific study in the context of Trinidad and British Guiana in A Question of Labour: Indentured Immigration into Trinidad and British Guiana 1875-1917, Kingston: Ian Randle Publishers, 1994. 3. Colin Simmons, ‘“De-Industrialization”, Industrialization and the Indian Economy, c. 1850-1947’, Modern Asian Studies, Special Issue, paper presented at the Conference on Indian Economic and Social History, Cambridge University, April 1984, vol. 19, no. 3 (1985), p. 594. 4. Peter Robb, ‘British Rule and Indian “Improvement”’, The Economic History Review, New Series, vol. 34, no. 4 (November 1981), p. 509. 5. Dadabhai Naoroji, Poverty and Un-British Rule in India, Delhi: Government of India, Publications Division, 1996 (1st pub. 1901), p. iv. Dadabhai Naoroji (1825-1917) was known as the ‘Grand Old Man of India’. He was a Parsi intellectual and educator and one of the earlier political leaders in India. He was the first Asian to become a British Member of Parliament and he served as an MP in the Parliament of the United Kingdom between 1892 and 1895. Naoroji was educated at Elphinstone College, Bombay and by 1855 he was Professor of Mathematics and Natural Philosophy at this college. He later became professor of Gujarati at University College, London. In

Indian Indentureship in Context

6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

11. 12. 13. 14. 15.

16. 17. 18. 19. 20.

21.

22. 23.

51

1867, he helped to establish the East India Association. In 1874, he became Prime Minister of Baroda and later he was a member of the Legislative Council of Bombay (1885-8). He was elected President of the Congress in 1886. Irfan Habib, Essays in India History: Towards a Marxist Perception, London: Anthem Press, South Asian Studies Series, 2002, p. 57. Bipan Chandra, E ssays on Colonialism, Delhi: Orient Longman, 1999, p. 82. Chandra, p. 194. Dadabhai Naoroji, Poverty and Un-British Rule in India, Delhi: Government of India, 1996, p. vi. Chandra, 82. See also R.C. Dutt, Th e Economic History of India Under Early British Rule: From the Rise of the British Power in 1757, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1901. Chandra, p. 258. A.K. Bagchi, The Political Economy of Underdevelopment, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982, p. 81 Bagchi, p. 78. Habib, p. 304. John Adams and Robert Craig West, ‘Money, Prices, and Economic Development in India, 1861-1895’, The Journal of Economic History, The Tasks of Economic History, vol. 39, no. 1 (March 1979), p. 58. Naoroji, p. vi. Chandra, p. 83. Habib, p. 303. Ibid., p. 360. Amitava Krishna Dutt, ‘The Origins of Uneven Development: The Indian Subcontinent’, The American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings of the Hundred and Fourth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association, vol. 82, no. 2 (May 1992), p. 149. See Paul Bairoch, ‘International Industrialization Levels from 1750 to 1980’, Journal of European Economic History, vol. 11, no. 2 (1982), pp. 270-80. See also, Alan Heston, ‘National Income’, in Dharma Kumar and Tapan Raychaudhuri (eds.), The Cambridge Economic History of India, vol. 2: c. 1757-c. 1970, Cambridge: Cambridge Uni­ versity Press, 1983. Dutt, p. 177. Tirthankar Roy, ‘Economic History and Modern India: Redefining the Link’, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 16, no. 3 (Summer, 2002), p. 112.

52

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

24. Bagchi, p. 82. 25. See Peter Robb, ‘British Rule and Indian “Improvement” ’, The Economic History Review, New Series, vol. 34, no. 4 (Nov. 1981), p. 512. See also Amiya Kumar Bagchi, The Political Economy of Underdevelopment, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982. 26. Amiya Kumar Bagchi, ‘De-industrialization in Gangetic Bihar, 1809­ 1901’, in S.C. Sarkar, Essays in Honour of Prof. S.C. Sarkar, Delhi: People’s Publishing House, 1976, p. 512. 27. See Amiya Kumar Bagchi, ‘De-industrialization in India in the 19th Century: Some Theoretical Implications’, The Journal of Development Studies, vol. XII (1976), pp. 135-64. 28. Irfan Habib, ‘Studying a Colonial Economy without Perceiving Colonialism’, Modern Asian Studies, Special Issue, paper presented at the Conference on Indian Economic and Social History, Cambridge University, April 1984, vol. 19, no. 3 (1985), p. 378. 29. Robb, p. 516. 30. Dutt, p. 129. 31. As quoted by Sabyasachi Bhattacharya in Dharma Kumar and Tapan Raychaudhuri (eds.), The Cambridge Economic History of India, vol. 2: c. 1757-c. 1970, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983, p. 291. 32. Paul Harnetty provided an alternative view by noting that while traditional industries declined, displaced craft workers turned to agricultural labour or became small cultivators as these occupations became more profitable. See Paul Harnetty, ‘Cotton Exports and Indian Agriculture, 1861-1870’, Economic History Review, vol. XXIV (1971), pp. 414-29. 33. Tirthankar Roy, ‘Economic History and Modern India: Redefining the Link’, The Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 16, no. 3 (Summer, 2002), p. 114. 34. Chandra, p. 258. 35. Rajat Ray and Ratna Ray, ‘Zamindars and Jotedars: A Study of Rural Politics in Bengal’, Modern Asian Studies, vol. 9, no. 1 (1975), p. 98. 36. Ray and Ray, p. 88. 37. See Sabyasachi Bhattacharya’s section ‘Eastern India’ in Dharma Kumar and Tapan Raychaudhuri (eds.), The Cambridge Economic History of India, vol. 2: c. 1757-c. 1970, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983, p. 325. 38. P.J. Marshall, ‘Economic and Political Expansion: The Case of Oudh’, Modern Asian Studies, vol. 9, no. 4 (1975), p. 475.

Indian Indentureship in Context

53

39. Francis Buchanan (Hamilton), A Geographical, Statistical and Historical Description of the District, a Zilla, of Dinajpur, in the Province, or Soubah, of Bengal, Baptist Mission Press, 1883, p. 244. 40. Ray and Ray, p. 85. 41. Ibid., p. 82. 42. Roy, p. 112. 43. Ibid., p. 113. 44. ‘Mr. Geogheghan’s Report on Coolie Emigration from India’, House of Commons Papers; Accounts and Papers 314, XLVII, 1874, p. 77. 45. Census of India, 1871 and 1881. The Presidency of Bengal was broken down into four great provinces of unequal size but with strongly defined characteristics: Bihar, Bengal proper, Orissa and Chota Nagpur. The great provinces were again broken down into nine administrative divisions, two of which were within Bihar – Patna and Bhaugulpore. These nine divisions were further broken down into 45 districts and almost every district was dissected into two or more sub-divisions each of which was administered by a resident Magistrate who was subordinate to the Magistrate of the district. The sub-districts were partitioned into thannahs or police station jurisdiction of 40 sq. miles. Bihar was the second largest Province, one-quarter of the whole, with a land space of 44,139 sq. miles. Division Patna was 23,647 sq. miles and it comprised the districts of Patna proper, Gaya, Shahabad, Tirhoot, Saran (Sarun) and Champaran (Champarun). 46. ‘Annual Report on Emigration from the Port of Calcutta to British and French Colonies’ for the years 1878-1913, in Proceedings of the Government of India, Department of Commerce and Industry, Emigration Department, 1878-1915. 47. ‘Annual Report on Emigration from the Port of Calcutta to British and French Colonies’ for the years 1878-1913, in Proceedings of the Government of India, Department of Commerce and Industry, Emigration Department, 1878-1915. 48. Table constructed based on statistics in the Proceedings of the Government of Bengal, Revenue and Agriculture Department, Emigration Branch, 1883-1918. 49. Proceedings of the Government of Bengal, Revenue and Agriculture, Emigration Branch, 1865-79. 50. Indian Famine Commission, R eport of the Indian Famine Com­ mission, 1898. Indian Council of Historical Research, New Delhi. 51. Annual Report of emigration from Calcutta for 1883-4, in

54

52. 53. 54.

55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60.

61. 62. 63. 64. 65.

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’? Proceedings of the Government of Bengal, Revenue and Agriculture, Emigration Branch, 1885. Report of the Indian Famine Commission, 1898, p. 13. Ibid., p. 150. Figures tabulated based on statistics given in Annual Report of Emigration from the Port of Calcutta to British and French Colonies for the year 1898, Proceedings of the Government of Bengal, Revenue and Agriculture, Emigration Branch, 1898. Yang, p. 43. James Austin Bourdillon, ‘District Census Report, 1881, Bengal’, p. 159. Ibid. Bourdillon, ‘District Census Report, 1891, Patna Division’, p. 402. Henry Beverley, ‘The Census of Bengal’, Journal of the Statistical Society of London, vol. 3, no. 1 (March 1874), p. 98. Percentages calculated from the District Census Report, 1881, Bengal, pp. 43-159. The classification of occupation according to the Census of India 1881 was as follows: 1. Professional Class – civil servants; army and navy; learned professions; literary and scientific men or artists. 2. Domestic Class – all employed (if at all) in houses – servants. 3. Commercial Class – merchants. 4. Agricultural Class – employed in producing grain, fruit, grass, animals, and other products from the soil. The heads of the Class were paid not directly for their services but indirectly in the price of the products that they sell in the market or elsewhere. Agricultural servants and labourers are paid in wages that the farmer advances. 5. Industrial Class – makers or artisans. 6. Indefinite or Non-productive Class – general labourers, persons of property returned as of no occupation and persons supported by the community. Beverley, p. 98. William Wilson Hunter, The Imperial Gazetteer of India: The Indian Empire, vol. 3: Economic, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1908, p. 94. Bourdillon, ‘District Census Report, 1881, Bengal’, p. 197. Beverley, p. 81. J.A. Baines, ‘Distribution and Movement of the population in India’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, vol. 56, no. 1 (March 1893), pp. 10-12.

Indian Indentureship in Context

55

66. Yang, p. 47. 67. Ibid., p. 48. 68. S.H. Fremantle, ‘Report on the supply of Labour in the United Provinces and in Bengal’, Lucknow, 1906, p. 43. 69. Yang, p. 46. 70. This is according to the ‘Emigrants’ Registers’. This was a rather vague caste classification used to place all those registered for the system who were engaged in some form of agricultural activities. 71. For a more detailed analysis of caste and emigration see Radica Mahase, ‘Caste, Religion and Gender Differentiations amongst Indentured Labourers from Bihar to Trinidad, 1870 to 1900’, in Brinsley Samaroo and Ann Marie Bissessar (eds.), The Construction of an Indo-Caribbean Diaspora, St. Augustine: UWI School of Continuing Studies, 2005. 72. This is just a fragment of Sen’s thesis. For a deeper analysis see Amartya Sen, Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1981. 73. John W. Mellor and Sarah Gavian, ‘Famine: Causes, Prevention, and Relief ’, Science, New Series, vol. 235, no. 4788 (30 January 1987), p. 541 74. Munshi Rahman Khan, Autobiography of An Indian Indentured Labourer Munshi Rahman Khan (1874-1972): Jeevan Prakash, trans. Kathinka Sinha-Kerkhoff, Ellen Bal and Alok Deo Singh, Delhi: Shipra Publications, 2005, p. xiii. This is the first autobiography of a first generation Indian indentured labourer which has been published till now. Munshi Rahman Khan was born in Hamirpur, United Provinces in 1874. He arrived in the Dutch colony of Suriname in 1898 at the age of 24. He was employed on the plantation Skerpi. 75. Noor Kumar Mahabir, The Still Cry: Personal Accounts of East Indians in Trinidad and Tobago during Indentureship (1845-1917), Tacarigua: Calaloux Publications, 1985, p. 49. The account is given in Trinidadian Creole. An English translation of the above is ‘I came to work for money and then to return. Those Muslim guys fooled me and brought me to this country (Trinidad). He said that there is a lot of money and he asked me how much I was getting every month. I told him three rupees and he said, “You are stupid”. There you will get twelve and a half annas everyday, to sift sugar. Everyone is glad to come to this country’. 76. See B. Foley, ‘Report on Labour in Bengal’, Calcutta, 1906, pp. 38-58 as well as the Gazetteer of Bengal and North East India: Rangpur.

56

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

77. Judith Brown and Rosemary Foot, Migration: The Asian Experience, London: Macmillan Press, 1994, p. 3. 78. Table constructed based on the figures quoted from the Proceedings of the Government of Bengal, Home Department, Emigration Branch, 1858 to 1860. 79. Percentage calculated from statistics recorded in the ‘Annual Reports of the Protector of Emigrants in Calcutta’, Proceedings of the Government of Bengal, Revenue and Agriculture, Emigration Branch, 1845 to 1918. 80. ‘Statement showing civil condition of the population’, Census of India, Bengal, 1881. 81. See Radica Mahase, 2018, ‘The Men who Controlled Indian Women – Indentureship, Patriarchy and Women’s “Liberation” in Trinidad’, in Women in the Indian Diaspora: Historical Narratives and Contemporary Challenges, ed. Amba Pande, Singapore: Springer, 2018. 82. ‘Government Circular, no. 88, dated 19 July 1879, paragraph 3’, Proceedings of the Hon’ble the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal during 1900, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press, 1900, p. 569. 83 ‘Statement showing the cause of the rejection of emigrants’ in Correspondence from Pt. Mohun Lall, Deputy Magistrate to the Magistrate of the Ghazipur District, 1879, Proceedings of the Hon’ble Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal during 1900, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press, 1900, p. 540. 84. Ibid.

CHAPTER 2

Imperialist Structures

The system is as follows: Colonial Governments appoint persons of approved character to conduct emigration on their behalf from the Presidency towns of India; these agents employ recruiters, of whose respectability they are required to convince the Government Pro­ tector of Emigrants; these recruiters persuade people to emigrate, and take them before Magistrates, who register the engagement; the recruits are then conveyed to Calcutta, Madras or Bombay, where they are housed under the immediate eye of the Emigrant Agent in depots which have been licensed as fit places for the col­ lection of emigrants by the Protector. They are thence shipped on board vessels which are also licensed, care being taken that they are equipped in every respect with what is needed to ensure the safety of the passengers on their long voyage: and there the direct concern of the Government with the transaction ends.1

On the one hand, British imperialist policies played a critical role in setting the scene for the emigration of labourers from various villages and districts of India, while on the other hand, the entire scheme was structured along imperialist lines. The system was one that was initiated by the policies of imperialism – British planters in some of Britain’s colonies needed labour to support their planta­ tion economies and did not hesitate to import this labour from another British colony. Thus, the transfer of labour from one part of the British Empire to another part of the Empire, would cater to the needs of the British planters and merchants and Britain on the whole. In this context, it was important to structure the system in such a way that it would appear as a favourable system, but at the same time it would facilitate imperialist policies at all levels.

58

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

This chapter examines the dynamics of Indian emigration within the structure of imperialism. It analyses the policies of the British Imperial Government and its decision to utilize human capital in the form of Indian labour. It looks at the procurement, trans­ portation, distribution and maintenance of indentured labour. Specifically, it discusses the logistics of imperialism in relation to the recruitment of Indian indentured labourers and the trans­ portation of these labourers from one British colony to another. It looks at the imperialist framework which existed in British colonies and the provisions that the British Imperial Government made for indentured labourers from the time of recruitment to the time of settlement in the colonies. It is important to understand the imperial context of the logistics of indentureship as it gives a more comprehensive understanding of the grievances which were articulated by the labourers, Indian nationalists, and other individuals and groups and the eventual abolition of the labour scheme. Domination and control – key features of imperialist policies – were evident in all the labour-importing territories, though the exact extent to which they were implemented differed according to the individual colony. The general structure of the indentureship scheme shared more similarities than differences, at least in terms of recruitment, registration in India and stay at the depots. Maritime transportation and depot management in the individual colonies were also similar. The differences were evident more in the penal codes for the various territories and the policies regarding settlement or lack of settlement in some cases. The core focus of imperialism (in an age of capitalism) is the idea of profit maximization. With this in mind, the indentureship system and the emigration of labour from one part of the empire, was geared towards profit maximization in another part of the empire. Alongside this is the notion of control and domination which was needed to maintain power over the labour force, and to transport labour more efficiently and in a less costly manner. Both profit maximization and domination can be seen quite clearly in relation to the logistics of the indentureship system. The system reflected the control and authority of the colonial powers from the time labour was recruited right until labourers were encouraged to

Imperialist Structures

59

settle in colonies, such as those in British West Indies. Most clearly discernible is the ability, both physical and authoritative, of a dom­ inant power/group to coerce and manipulate labour, so much so that this labour could be transported over an extensive geographic area for the benefit of members of the dominant power/group. This chapter discusses the manner in which imperial policy actu­ ally worked in relation to the indentureship system. While it is possible to present a larger picture of the whole process of emigration, it is important to note that the structure of the indentureship system underwent many changes from 1845 to 1917, when recruitment of labourers was prohibited by law. In the initial stages of the system, more liberty was taken by the plant­ ers and the colonial authorities but by the end of the nineteenth century, a closer watch was kept on the scheme and policies were implemented to regulate the conditions on the plantations and in the colonies. Various changes were made to the official regulations on indenture, partly due to pressure from the Indian nationalists in India, resistance by the labourers and agitation by individuals and groups. The growing awareness in Britain and the increase of criticism in India fuelled by the rise of liberal opinions in Britain and the voice of the press in India influenced structural changes in policies relating to the health of the labourers as well as to the conditions of Indian women amongst other things.

Procurement of Indentured Labourers In theory, the Indian indentureship system was a well-structured system – it was structured in such a way that it would work effi­ ciently and speedily to provide the planters with a labour supply. At the same time it was structurally geared towards protecting the interests of all parties involved (whether or not this actually occurred is a different matter altogether). The planters in the colo­ nies informed the colonial authorities in each colony of the number of labourers they needed for the year. It was then the responsibility of the colonial government to inform the Colonial Office of the total number of labourers needed and the cost of importing them. Following this, directives were issued to the India Office and the

60

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

colonial government in the relevant presidencies in India. Conse­ quently, the Emigration Agent in Calcutta2 would hire sub-agents who then hired recruiters. The sub-agents were responsible for every expense connected with the labourers up to the day of entry at the Calcutta depot – for the hire of the depots, registration fees, railway fares, food and the pay of the recruiters and depot staff (chaprassis). The emigration agent however, bore the cost of the recruiters’ license fees and fees for the medical examination of the labourers. 3 According to the definition of terms of the Immigration Ordi­ nance of October 1881, a recruiter was a man licensed under the Act to recruit emigrants on behalf of an emigration agent.4 These recruiters, however, often hired sub-recruiters or arkatias to ven­ ture into the districts and villages and closer to the agricultural labouring population. Arkatias were also normally males but women were ‘undoubtedly employed near large towns as arkatis, such women being generally connected in some way either with the recruiter or with one of the chaprassis of the depots.’5 The sub-recruiters were responsible for recruiting labourers physically suitable for agricultural work on the plantations. When potential labourers were procured they were then taken to the registering officer responsible for that district or locality. It was the duty of the registering officer to ascertain that the intending labourer was acting on his/her own interest and was not coerced in any way into registering for the system. If successfully registered by the officer in charge, the labourers were kept at a sub-depot until sufficient labourers had been recruited and registered, before being trans­ ported by train to the main depot in Calcutta. In theory, recruitment was meant to be a very systematic activ­ ity which placed decision-making power in the hands of the Indian labourers. None the less, despite the colonial government’s attempts to regulate the recruitment of labourers, numerous problems crept in throughout the period of emigration. One problem that attracted the most negative criticism of the system, which probably contributed most towards its collapse, was that of unscrupulous recruitment practices. Throughout the period of indentured emi­ gration the colonial authorities came under heavy criticism from

Imperialist Structures

61

interest groups and individuals who felt that labourers were being coerced into emigrating. Some historians have expressed the view that labourers were recruited under purely legal means and that recruitment worked according to the dictates of the colonial state. P.C. Emmer for instance, has noted that, ‘Little evidence exists indicating that fraud, deception and even kidnapping were widely used in order to meet the yearly demand for indentured labourers overseas. On the contrary, many precautions were taken, both by the Indian authorities as well as by the recruiting agencies, in order to prevent irregular recruiting practices.’6 While it is difficult to quantify the extent to which labourers were coerced, whether subtly or overtly, into registering for the system, there is evidence to show that some labourers were indeed deceived and/or forced into migration. In 1876, there was a case of a boy, Pudai, who was kidnapped by recruiters. The boy had gone to Allahabad for a holiday with his father. It turned out that he was enticed into the recruiters’ depot at Kydganj and there detained, although he begged to be sent home. There is another case of Partabia who said that she was tricked and ‘she was given sweets and told to come on a trip where she would get much money. She was then taken to the Calcutta depot. When her father and fatherin-law heard where she was, they came to look for her. But the authorities locked her in a room where she could hear her relatives but they could not hear her.’7 Cases like these were common but many were not brought to the attention of the magistrates so that the voice of the labourer remained submerged in the sources. Also, cases which were taken to the courts were not recorded or publicized so that they will not attract the attention of anti-indenture individuals and organiza­ tions. At the same time, recruitment for the indentureship scheme was a profit-making activity as the arkatias were paid per head.8 According to Major D.G. Pitcher, ‘. . . the sub-agents received for the most part a monthly salary, in addition to a certain commis­ sions on each recruit payable on embarkation’.9 As a result, arkatias used various tactics to obtain recruits. Thus, some labourers were manipulated, coerced or pressured in one way or the other into registering themselves for the system. Female labourers were often

62

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

most prone towards the illicit activities of the recruiters mainly because of two reasons. First, recruiters were paid Rs. 35 for a female labourer and Rs. 25 for a male labourer.10 Second, added pressure was placed on recruiters to obtain Indian women after 1868, when a quota of 40 women to every 100 men was fixed for every emigrant vessel.11 This stipulation was an attempt to maintain a relatively contented labour force in the colonies and thus ensure profit maximization, as well as to allay the fears of the Anti-Slavery and Aborigines Protec­ tion Society in Britain, and to pacify the anti-emigration activists in India and in the colonies, thereby ensuring the continuation of Indian emigration. Adverse publicity and agitation throughout the world would have had the effect of causing serious problems to the emigration of labourers. For this reason, most of the policies which were effected, were either geared towards curbing criticism against the system, were direct results of criticisms or were simply implemented to ensure that the system was running as effectively as possible and would therefore prevent further criticism. The idea of meeting a gender quota represented one attempt on the part of the colonial authorities to ensure an efficient labour force. Proper recruitment policies can be seen as another such attempt by the colonial authorities to obtain potential labour­ ers as cost-effectively and within a short time as was possible. Consequently, various regulations pertaining to recruitment of labourers were implemented. Magistrates, envoys of the colonial government, were sent out to the various provinces and districts to administer the procurement of Indian labour and to prevent, as far as possible, irregularities in the system. By the 1870s, recruiters were complaining that the magistrates were being too thorough in their investigations of the intending labourers which resulted in less than half the number recruited actually being allowed to depart for the main depot at Garden Reach. In 1878, there was even a suggestion that European officers should replace the Indian mag­ istrates in this function. The idea was that the Europeans would exercise a wider discretion and the process of obtaining labourers would be accelerated.12 Of course, having European officials would also facilitate British imperialist endeavours.

Imperialist Structures

63

At the same time, recruiters employing illegal means to procure labour were to be punished. In Pudai’s case, the three recruiters were tried in court and found guilty of charges of kidnapping. Two were given six months rigorous imprisonment and the other one was imprisoned for three months.13 Throughout the emigration period there were cases of the confiscation of recruiters’ licenses due to illegal recruiting practices. In 1898, for example, out of the 701 licenses granted to individuals to recruit labourers for the Trinidad depot, 27 were subsequently cancelled, some for the fol­ lowing offences (Table 6): The other major impediment which occurred regarding recruit­ ment, was the lack of accurate information given to the potential emigrants during the recruitment process. This presented vari­ ous problems. By the beginning of the twentieth century, Indian nationalists and various interest groups were complaining that most of the labourers who proceeded to the colonies were unaware of the situation in which they were placing themselves. They felt that it was imperative that the labourers were informed about the contract stipulations and conditions in the colonies. This general feeling had already been expressed by the planters in the colonies, who were often faced with a new batch of labourers who were expecting less arduous tasks. In the 1890s, the Protector of Immigrants in Trinidad suggested to the Government of India that attempts should be made by the colonial authorities in India to inform the intending labourers of the aspects of the system which were of direct concern to them.14 In 1898, the Government of India table 6: reasons for confiscation of recruiters’ licenses15 No. 1 1 1 2 1 1 1

Reason Concerned with a case of rape and murder Registered 1 ‘coolie’ under a false name and address Detained by force 2 persons unwilling to emigrate Unlawfully disposed off some emigrants Induced a woman to emigrate under false promises For rape and wrongful confinement Kept a woman in his depot as his mistress

64

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

informed the Protector of Emigrant and the depot agents at Cal­ cutta that recruiters as well as the registering officers were required to inform the Indians about the ‘terms of engagement of intending emigrants’ and to give them a general picture of what life would be in the colony.16 This led to the publication of a Hindi translation of the ‘Bill to consolidate and amend the law relating to emigration’ in the Bihar Gazette on 19 December, 1899.17 An Oriya transla­ tion was published in the Uriya Gazette on 1 February 1900.18 The labourers were required to sign or put their thumbprints on the contracts. It is not surprising that the majority of the labourers had no idea what they were agreeing to, as contracts were normally written in English and a few of the vernacular languages promi­ nent in the areas of recruitment such as Hindi, Urdu and Bengali. However, the majority of the intending indentured labourers was either illiterate or literate in other vernacular languages. Certainly, very few were able to understand English. While theoretically, recruitment was meant to be a wellstructured activity, the way in which the recruitment of labour was supposed to work and the manner in which it actually worked were diametrically opposed to each other in numerous ways. At times, the recruitment of indentured labourers, like almost all other substructures of the indentureship system, mirrored the colonial authorities’ inefficiency in defining a foundational framework, on which the indentured labourers could be registered for the system and shipped to the colonies.

Holding Centers: The ‘Coolie’ Depots On arrival at the depot, the labourer was ready to begin the process of becoming an indentured coolie; henceforth he was just one of many humans in a vast assembly process.19

Once an individual was registered s/he was taken to a waiting area located in the district and kept there until sufficient labourers were recruited. These places where the potential emigrants were accommodated by the recruiters were referred to as sub-depots and were found throughout the areas where recruitment occurred.

Imperialist Structures

65

The sub-depots were small structures with a single room where both male and female labourers were kept, sometimes separated by a thin partition. Sometimes there was a latrine located at the back of this structure. The sub-depots were not well-maintained by the recruiters and sub-agents and generally ignored by the agents and colonial authorities. This is not surprising, considering that the housing of labourers at the sub-depots was meant to be a solely temporary affair and intending emigrants were expected to stay there for only a few days until a sufficient labour supply was procured and transportation was arranged to the main depot at Garden Reach, Calcutta. Also, they were scattered throughout the areas of recruitment, in remote villages and districts – areas not frequently visited by the colonial officials associated with the system. Hence, these were neither supervised nor condemned by the British colonial officers. At Calcutta, the depots were normally leased for ten years. In 1908, the main depot at Garden Reach was leased from the British India Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. at a sum of £600 per annum.20 It contained a number of barracks and was surrounded by a high wall which served to control the flow of traffic in and out of the depot. There were separate sheds for cooking, a thatched house for the doorkeeper and quarters for the hospital’s servants. There was also a structure that was used as a hospital, with a dispensary attached to it.21 Until the 1880s, the management and structure of the depot was a relatively simple and mechanical one with little interference from outside parties or officials. However, in the 1870s certain grievances were brought to the attention of the colonial authori­ ties. Labourers in British Guiana were unhappy with their general conditions and there were strikes on some plantations. There were high mortality rates of Indians in Grenada and Reunion which led to the prohibition of the scheme in those territories and free Indians in Mauritius protested against poor conditions and low wages. Due to these issues in these territories the Government of India was forced to investigate the conditions of the labourers and the structure of the indentureship scheme in general. After the establishment of Royal Commissions of Enquiry in British Guiana and Mauritius and several investigations, the Govern-

66

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

ment of India felt it necessary to restructure the indentureship scheme and a new Indian Ordinance (Act XXI of 1883) was enacted. While the Act made various changes to the manner in which the scheme was structured in general, it impacted specifi­ cally on the management of the depots and the way in which the labourers would be cared for during their stay in the depot. The 1883 Act set the guidelines for the administration of the depot at Garden Reach and with only slight changes, continued regulating the depots until 1917. As a system geared towards profit maximization with minimum cost in investment, the law placed emphasis on the proper management of the depot and the health of the labourers. The colonial authorities had recognized that a healthy labour force would have a two-pronged effect: it was essential for the profitability of the plantation economy and it would allay protests against the system. In order to maintain a relatively healthy labouring population, it was necessary to have a well-maintained depot, efficiently administered by capable individuals. Accordingly, the Provincial Governor appointed a Protector of Emigrants to manage the depot. His role was to ‘supervise emigration within the local limits of his authority, and to protect generally, so far as lies in his power, the interests of all emigrants’.22 The Protector was aided by a Medical Inspector who was hired, ‘To examine and certify to the fitness for the voyage to some other place of all emigrants admitted into the depots at the port of embarkation, and to supervise generally the sanitary arrangements of those depots and of the vessels in which the emi­ grants are to be conveyed to such other place.’23 An Emigration Sub-Agent and other government officials were employed to aid in the supervision and the running of the depot, as well as the embarkation of the emigrants. The law also stipulated that the emigrant was to remain in quarantine for fourteen days but in some cases this could have ranged anywhere from six weeks to two months, depending on the detainee’s infection and general physical condition. The labourers were supposed to be given regu­ lar medical treatment by the Resident Medical Officer. From the point of view of legislation all mechanisms were in place to guarantee the safety and comfort of the registered

Imperialist Structures

67

emigrants at the sub-depots and at the main depot in Calcutta. However, there is a discernible difference between the stipulations of the Indian Ordinance and the actual working of the depot. One of the most distressing problems faced by the colonial authorities was poor health of the labourers. An unhealthy labour force pre­ sented a major threat to the stability of the plantation economy. Poor health was synonymous with an increase in medical care and a loss of labour productivity due to time spent away from the workplace. Sometimes planters had to wait longer periods to replenish or increase their labour force and sick labourers were quickly disheartened by their situation and they took a long time to adapt to their new environment. The planters and colonial offi­ cers in the colonies often blamed the authorities at Calcutta for the poor state of health of the immigrants, although health conditions deteriorated during the transportation of the labourers. In 1901, the Office of the Protector of Immigrants in Trinidad complained that ‘…the Department in Calcutta has not been doing its duty, and has lately sent immigrants, the greater number of whom are of such poor physique that they are practically sent here to die.’24 Throughout the indentureship period, the potential migrants suffered with cholera, dysentery, diarrhoea, fever, measles, smallpox, venereal diseases, pneumonia, bronchitis and other respira­ tory affections.25 There was a corresponding high mortality rate at the depots. In the 1870s, there was an average death rate of 11.1 per cent or 111 per 1,000 Indians.26 In 1900, one official noted in the weekly hospital report that fever, diarrhoea, cholera, measles, smallpox, syphilis, opthalmia, anaemia, dysentery, hydrocele and jaundice were the most common diseases found amongst emigrants on arrival at the depot.27 It is also true that many diseases were rampant simply because of the lack of knowledge and care during the recruitment of labour­ ers. Consequently, some labourers brought diseases to the depot. One official noted that, ‘Many of the emigrants are admitted into the depots in a very anaemic, ill-fed condition, and are detained in the hope and belief that they will improve before the time arrives for embarkation’.28 However, the situation was often exacerbated by the poor con­

68

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

ditions of the depot in general; lack of facilities available as well as poor medical treatment. By the end of the 1800s, high cases of sickness at the depots caused the colonial officials to pay more attention to the conditions of the depots in an attempt to prevent further criticism of the labour scheme. From a legislative point of view, the law was supposed to safeguard the health of the labour­ ers. In practice however, most of the legal stipulations were totally ignored, only partially put into practice or implemented with inconsistencies. One example of this can be seen with the medical examination and confinement prior to embarkation. One emi­ grant, Khedan Algu remembered that, ‘A man met them as they arrived at the depot and asked their name, age, sex, etc and if they wanted to go willingly to Trinidad – that they could come back anytime they wished. They were then taken to the doctor who poked him all over.’29 Jankey Tiwari Maharaj spent nearly two months in the Calcutta depot and underwent a medical examination.30 Maharajee stayed one month and was never examined by a doctor.31 Munnay was seen everyday by the doctor but boarded the Ganges only after ten days of staying at the depot while Mohan was examined and boarded the Chenab ship the very next day.32 Rules about medical examination and quarantine apparently were not enforced rigidly. Nevertheless, every single Emigrants’ Register, for all the ships that left from the port of Calcutta, contained a certification signed by the Depot Surgeon at Calcutta which said ‘Certified that the above mentioned persons who have been examined and passed by me, are free from all bodily disease, that they have either have small pox or have been vaccinated and that they are fit subjects for emi­ gration’ – a statement that was not always true.33

The Ships and the People they Transported Like many other aspects of indentureship, the shipping of Indian labourers under the indentureship scheme was an imperialist activity. The ships that took the Indian labourers were built by ship­ builders based in England and Scotland, they were sold to owners who belonged to the United Kingdom (UK) and they all operated

Imperialist Structures

69

out of the main ports in the UK, namely London, Manchester and Glasgow. The contracts were awarded to UK shipowners who also stocked most of their goods at UK cities. Thus, very similar to the days of African slavery, UK maritime and mercantile industries were stimulated as a result of the Indian indentureship system. Prior to 1875, various ships had transported the emigrants but there were not much consolidated efforts to regularize the entire process of shipping. However, high mortality rates and complaints from various individuals and organizations necessitated changes. Planters in the colonies felt that the labourers arrived in such a debilitated manner because of the poor treatment during the voy­ age and colonial agents expressed the opinion that ship captains needed to provide better food and medical care to the labourers. Consequently, the imperial government started giving contracts for specific ships to transport this human cargo. In 1875, the contract for the transportation of Indian labourers to the West Indies was awarded to James Nourse Limited.34 From 1877, the Nourse line expanded its operation and was awarded contracts to transport emigrants from Calcutta to the French West Indies, Mauritius, Suriname and Natal. Nourse also had contracts to take labourers to Fiji, and goods from India to these countries as well as to Rangoon.35 The ships used to transport labourers were usually three-masted schooners around 500 tons. The stipulated length of time of the journey to the West Indies was 20 weeks for a sailing ship and 13 weeks for a steamer.36 The Nourse shipping line was paid £11 12s. 6d. per statute adult to the British West Indies and the cost changed slightly for other territories. In the last decades of the scheme the company attempted to obtain an increase in the cost per statute adult.37 In 1915, it requested an increase in the amount paid per statute adult, £16 per statute adult for a contract of five years, £15 per statute adult for a contract of seven years and £14 per statute adult for a contract of ten years.38 By 1880, the British imperial government was paying closer attention to the shipping arrangements and strict rules were laid down for all emigrant vessels awarded contracts for the transpor­ tation of emigrants. Ship captains were now mandated to provide some sort of medical care to the labourers during the journey to

70

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

the colonies. In fact, all ships were to be outfitted with medical services (a hospital) with a medical doctor on board and sufficient supplies to cover the length of the journey. Also, emigrants were supposed to be given constant medical care. According to the regulations, Before any Emigrants are embarked in the ship there shall be on board a sufficient quantity of fuel, water, provisions, stores, medicines, instru­ ments, and medical comforts, for their use during the voyage, of a quality to be approved by the Government Officers, and of the descriptions and in the quantities prescribed by the Rules and Regulations of the Indian Government in force for the time being in reference to Coolie Emigra­ tion. The medicines, drugs and medical stores shall be obtained from the Society of Apothecaries, London.39

Given the high mortality rates and the number of cases of illnesses on board the ships, the Government of Bengal recom­ mended that the number of emigrants to the West Indian colonies be restricted to 350 in any one vessel in an attempt to prevent overcrowding. Colonial Agents in both India and the receiving colonies felt that overcrowding on board the ships was usually the main cause of high incidence of diseases and mortality rates. Legally, nothing was left to chance and interpretation. Legislation stipulated that all emigrants were to be given three meals of good quality per day and there were specific regulations which dictated how the Indians were to be accommodated on board the ships. For example, women were normally placed in the forward section with the married couples next and then the single men in the aft section, followed by the crew.40 As can be expected, the transportation of labourers was not as uneventful an activity, as the colonial authorities would prob­ ably have liked it to be. Like all other aspects of the system it was plagued with problems from the time of its inception up until the system was ended. First, there was always the problem of a high number of cases of sickness; motion sickness and fever were most prevalent on board the ships but there were also many instances of cerebo-spinal meningitis, measles, and mumps. From 1901 to 1903, 29 out of 91 of adult deaths (nearly one-third) was caused

Imperialist Structures

71

by cerebo-spinal meningitis.41 The number of cases increased after 1906, when there was an attempt to relocate the married persons (in order to separate the single women from the crew and the single men). A high number of cases of illnesses were especially prevalent amongst the female emigrants and the children and it was felt that a simple matter such as location on board may have contributed to this. The situation was intensified to the point where the surgeons, the ones directly in contact with the emigrants and most aware of their suffering on the journey, requested the Under Secretary to the Government of India, A.C. Walters, at a meet­ ing of surgeons on 5 April 1910, to allow them the discretion of berthing the emigrants. The surgeons were concerned with female emigrants, particularly those travelling on steamers and especially those who were pregnant or nursing mothers, who were located in the forward section of the ships where the ship’s full motion was felt during inclement weather.42 The attempt by the surgeons to change the way in which the Indians were accommodated on board the ships resulted in a long drawn-out discussion among the surgeons, the Emigration Agents at Calcutta and the office of the Under Secretary to the Govern­ ment of India. The way in which this issue was handled by the colonial authorities reflected the unsympathetic attitude towards the Indian labourers and showed quite clearly how the authorities procrastinated in implementing policies or changes in the logistics of the system. The surgeons were in full approval of the existing rule where the married people were berthed so as to separate single men and women. However, they reinforced the point that weather and other conditions made it difficult for women and children to be in the forward compartment.43 In the emigration scenario how­ ever, the surgeons were hired for a specific job which they were allowed to do as long as it did not conflict with the interests of the shipowners or planters, or did not interfere in maximizing profit. Hence, their recommendations would not be taken seriously and by 1916, the problem of the women’s location and the high cases of sickness amongst them on board emigrant vessels was still a big issue.44 Generally, the problems associated with the health of the

72

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

immigrants on board the ships were the same throughout the indentureship period and the colonial authorities failed miserably in their attempts to persuade the ships’ captains to place more emphasis on the medical care and general physical health of the labourers. Even though laws were passed, there was no one aboard the ships who were responsible for ensuring that the laws were implemented. Ship captains did whatever was needed to cut the cost of transportation of their cargo, and the doctors on board the ships were limited in what could be done without the support of the captains. Another major problem experienced throughout the indentureship period was that of overcrowding. On Sunday, 22 April 1917, when the S.S. Ganges landed in Trinidad (the last ship to arrive in Trinidad) there were 421 emigrants on board, 71 emigrants more than the official amount stipulated by the Government.45 This had been the norm throughout the indentureship period and govern­ ment policies were often so lax with respect to shipping that the laws were broken by the shipowners and captains. First, regular checks were not carried out prior to embarkation to ensure that ships left the port of Calcutta with the stipulated number on board. Second, there were many occasions where the law was actually flouted to accommodate ships that could not follow this regulation for whatever reasons. An attempt was made to prevent overcrowd­ ing by allocating specific space for each emigrant. Every adult was to be given 12 ft of space and each child less than 12 years of age would occupy 8 ft of space. The space allotted to the emigrants was the whole of the ship between the deck and the poop.46 This meant that only a specific number of emigrants could be accommodated on board any one ship at any particular time. This would have been one of the better attempts on the part of the colonial authori­ ties to ensure that overcrowding did not become a major problem. However, the authorities were not successful in implementing the law and ensuring that vessels were not overful. Once the actual space allotted to each labourer on board was exceeded it therefore meant that conditions were appropriate for the quick spread of diseases on board the ships. The colonial authorities in India often attempted to excuse the excess numbers

Imperialist Structures

73

by stating that the high mortality on board was a result of the out­ break of fever rather than overcrowding per se. They claimed that 12 cubic ft per emigrants was sufficient. They also noted that ships which were overloaded normally took about 59 emigrants more than the stipulated amount.47 The attitude of the colonial officials was probably most lucidly expressed in a report of 1868 which stated, ‘It seems unnecessary to fix a limit to the numbers car­ ried in a ship, until the average number in one vessel more nearly approaches the limit of numbers fixed by the Indian Jail Commis­ sion for jails than it does at present.’48 This attitude is not unexpected given the fact that by 1895, the trade in emigrants was considered a very profitable enterprise (from which the maximum benefits could be derived); hence many ships took the maximum number of passengers that could possibly be accommodated on board. Also, ships were paid per head and the more labourers on board, the higher the profit to the owners and captains. Overcrowding therefore became the norm, and those who disregarded this rule went unnoticed or if they were noticed, they were not penalized. The poor or inconsistent quality of the food also posed a prob­ lem to the transportation process and was often one of the factors which influenced an unhealthy emigrant group during the voyage to the colonies. The colonial authorities gave strict guidelines for the preparation of food on board the ships and every emigrant vessel was required by law to store specific quantities of goods and provisions. In reality however, there were numerous problems associated with the food provided on board the ships and this impacted immensely on the unhealthy conditions of the Indians. In the first case there were many situations where the instructions were simply not followed and ships left the port of Calcutta not fully stocked or with lower quality provisions. Added to this, the Indians were rather suspicious of what was served to them and many refused to eat or ate as little as possible. Hence, by the time they arrived at their destination they were generally malnourished and unfit for labour. A clear illustration of this occurred in 1902 when the ships were providing a type of meat flavouring made from beef. As the majority of the emigrants were Hindus, they

74

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

refused to use these and became suspicious of the food in general.49 Second, the quality of the food itself was questionable. For example, throughout 1902, there were cases of adulterated ghee being used and a notice had to be sent from the Protector of Emigrants to the ships’ captains advising them to exercise greater precaution against the source of supply.50 In cases where the food stored was spoilt, the emigrants had no choice but to use what was available. In rough weather, the bad food was combined with motion sickness to make many of them extremely ill.

Imperialism at Work: The Colonies On the arrival of any immigrant ship, the Protector, with a Medical Offi­ cer, shall inspect such ship and report to the Governor. The sick, if any, are taken care of and every immigrant shall be fed and lodged until allot­ ted to an employer, and on proof of any ill-treatment during the voyage or failure to supply sufficient food and water the master of the ship shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding 100l.51

The manner in which the labour scheme operated in the respective territories was a general reflection of the core facets of imperialism. The system was structured to benefit imperial interests at all levels, starting with the planters in the colonies and ending with the Brit­ ish Imperial Government. It was geared towards the creation of a compliant labour force, which was under the domination and control of those who held power, and who controlled the colonial mechanisms. The product of this labour were reaped by the colo­ nials and served the interests of the imperialists. The entire system was facilitated with ease as all the territories involved were within the British Empire and under the control of Britain, the ‘Mother Country’. In the case of territories such as Suriname, which was a Dutch colony, British colonialists policies were further consoli­ dated through agreements with the Netherlands. Britain signed an agreement with the Netherlands on 8 September 1870 in the Hague which allowed the Netherlands to take labourers from Brit­ ish India to the Dutch colony of Suriname.52

Imperialist Structures

75

Plantation Labour The core purpose of the transportation of labourers from one part of the British Empire to other parts within that same Empire was to facilitate the economic aspects of imperialism. British planters in various territories needed a relatively cheap and easily available, large labour force once the enslavement of Africans was prohibited in British colonies. The provision of Indian labourers was solely geared towards making the plantation economy economically viable. In cases where the Indian labourers thrived and became wealthier than would have been possible in India, this was sec­ ondary and simply a by-product of the indentureship system. The initial aim did not focus primarily on the labourers’ economic situation, but instead sought to address the economic position of the British planters. The main aim of the indentured scheme was to provide assistance to British planters who wanted a cheaper labour force so as to maximize profits. The general ‘Terms of Engagement of Intending Emigrants’ stipulated that Indian labourers who were contracted under the indentureship scheme would engage in the cultivation of the soil or the manufacture of produce on any plantation. In all the territories where indentureship existed, labourers were mandated to perform agricultural work for the benefit of the plantations – indeed, this was the fundamental reason why the system was actually devel­ oped. The actual terms under which the labourers were engaged in the various territories differed to some extent but the general understanding was that labourers were contracted to work in agriculture every day except Sundays and authorized holidays. The individual was required to work for nine hours on each work­ ing day and was attached to the specific plantation for five years from the date of allotment. This was not always the case in all the territories. In many cases, labourers were required to work much longer hours, especially during harvest time, and some planters did not give the labourers Sundays as an off day. The total years of engagement also differed according to the colony; for example the British West Indies labourers were contracted to a plantation for

76

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

five years but could not leave the colonies until completion of ten years residence. The ‘Terms of Engagement of Intending Emigrants’ were not set in stone. It changed during the indentureship period to accommo­ date the needs of the planters and/or the imperial government. A good example of this is seen with the stipulation pertaining to the return passage to India. Initially, in the first decades of the system, the labourer was entitled to a return passage to India free of charge once s/he had completed his/her contract and a specified number of years of continuous residence in the respective colony. However, the conditions of return changed over time. In one instance, desti­ tute or disabled labourers were entitled to free return passage and the child/dependent or wife of a destitute or a disabled person was entitled to free return passage on the same ship of the parent/hus­ band upon completion of his/her indenture. In another instance, male labourers were required to contribute one quarter of the return passage while a female labourer had to contribute one-sixth of the total cost. Later on, by the end of the nineteenth century, further changes stipulated that labourers had to pay the majority or all of their return passage as planters and colonial governments attempted to cut the cost of importation of labourers. The same laxity could be seen with the wages paid as well as provisions for medical care. According to the contract which the labourers signed prior to embarkation at the port of Calcutta, an able-bodied adult labourer over sixteen years of age was to be paid 12 annas or 16 pice for each day’s work while a minor (between ten and twelve years old) would receive 8 annas per day. All wages would be paid fortnightly. However, wages differed not only according to territory but also amongst plantations within some territories. In the British West Indies, the Indian Immigration Ordinance stipulated a wage rate of 25 cents a day but this figure differed according to territory. There was also differentiation based on gender. Sometimes there were changes in the classification of the immigrants according to age. In the post-1880 period, an adult immigrant was anyone above twelve years of age, a minor was ten to sixteen years and an infant was under ten years.53 However, the classification did not remain constant throughout the indenture­

Imperialist Structures

77

ship period as changes occurred conveniently to suit the needs of the planters, fluctuations in wages and the demand for labour. The same applied to other contractual stipulations such as the provision of medical care and accommodation on the plantations as well as allowances of food and clothing. These varied immensely according to territory and even within individual territories. Although there were general guidelines to regulate indentureship, these were often overlooked, the laws favoured the planters or penalties for breach of the laws were not severe enough to con­ vince or force the planters to abide by them. There are cases where planters were fined for neglect or abuse of labourers but these usu­ ally occurred only after labourers had demonstrated some form of protests by the labourers (as discussed in subsequent chapters). The main purpose of the indentureship scheme was to provide a relatively cheap and abundant labour supply which will facilitate profit maximization on the plantations in the territories where the contracted labourers would be used. Therefore, it is not surprising that planters did whatever they could to cut the cost of maintaining that labour force. One of the easiest ways to cut the cost of produc­ tion was to reduce the ‘benefits’ given to the labourers, hence why many of the stipulations of the ‘Terms of Engagement of Intending Emigrants’ and the various Immigration Ordinances which were passed in the individual territories, were either disregarded totally or only implemented at the convenience of the planters.

Control Over the Labourers One of the key instruments in maintaining a labour supply within an imperial and colonial context was the ability to control the labour force. During the period of African enslavement, vari­ ous forms of controls were exercised over a labour force that was seen as mere chattels. Physical punishment was the main form of control and whips and chains became symbolic of African enslavement. As Indian emigration came in the aftermath of the campaign to abolish African slavery and various interests groups had continued to keep watchful eyes on the indentureship system, particularly the British Anti-slavery and Aborigines Protection

78

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Society, other forms of controls were implemented by the planters. The idea was to create a labour force that was theoretically free (they were contracted labourers) but yet could be regulated by the planters and by the colonial authorities. Anxious to maintain the labour scheme, planters and the colo­ nial authorities in general, ensured that they had control over their labourers without appearing with whips and chains in hand. Contractual obligation regulated the amount of free time labour­ ers would have away from work. The stipulated 40 hours of work per week (during harvest season the hours were much longer) and confinement to the plantation are good examples of how the labourers were controlled. Labourers’ movements were restricted as in most territories; they were required to obtain passes allow­ ing them to leave the plantations. Additionally, the appointment of headmen and overseers from amongst the labouring population gave planters the opportunity to control their labour force while using the labourers themselves. This was equivalent to the system of appointing head slaves or drivers from amongst the African slave population. In both cases, the intention was to control the labour force by using their own people, and by creating a system of ‘meritocracy’ so that the labourers would be rewarded with a higher position if their output and behaviour were satisfactory to the planters and the plantation system. Added to this is the idea of cultural appeasement. Indian labourers were allowed to par­ ticipate in and propagate their cultural practices which they had transported with them to the host environment. This was aimed at making the labourers feel more comfortable and more settled in the plantation society with the intention that they would become a more contented and productive labour force. The colonial policy of ‘divide and rule’ also represent an attempt to keep the labour force in check, but in this case with the use of a system of isolation rather than instigating open confrontation between and amongst groups. In many of the territories, the colo­ nial authorities did not make any deliberate attempts to integrate the Indians into the wider society. They were either kept on the plantations, well away from the other ethnic groups or they were encouraged to settle in areas which had large Indian populations.

Imperialist Structures

79

In fact, most of the time, the indentured population interacted to a limited extent with the Europeans on the plantations. The nonindentured Indian population and Indians born in the colonies interacted with other groups in the wider society once they were not resident on the estates. The plantation environment itself represented a system of separation, limited interaction and gen­ eral control over almost all aspects of the life of the indentured labourers. Colonial authorities did not hesitate to use legislations to keep indentured labourers in check. In all territories, laws were passed with penal stipulations for a number of offences. Table 7 gives a comparison of the terms of indenture according to colonies:

Conclusion It is also important to understand that a labour force can be more easily subjugated and controlled when it is seen as inferior. The colonial attitude during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries was one of superiority and indifference to a less-civilized labour force. In all the territories, the difference between immigrants and planters extended beyond ethnicity. The disparity was noted in the levels of development in the societies from where both groups had come and ideologies of dominance and power of one group over the other. Hence, colonials often perceived the Indian immigrant populations as a backward class who now had an opportunity to ‘progress’ but were simply too lazy to take advantage of such an opportunity. Colonial actions were geared towards letting the Indian labourers know and accept their low position in the society. Indians were excluded from many activities of the larger society, they were never encouraged to develop a sense of identity and they were generally treated as an inferior people. Indian labourers were therefore not schooled in the ethics of surviving in a ‘developed’ society because they were simply seen as incapable of adapting to such a high state of advancement. The colonial authorities made attempts to regulate the inden­ tureship system on a theoretical basis which resulted in the passage and implementation of various acts of legislation. On a practical

Period of indenture

Adult males and females from 15 and upwards

Adult males from 16 and upwards Male from 12 to 16 years and females of any age

Jamaica

Ditto

Ditto

Ditto

Cultivation of the soil and manufacture of the produce

Work nature

Ditto

Adult males from 5 years 15 and upwards Male from 10 to 15 years and females above 10 years of age

Classification of emigrants

Trinidad

British Guiana

Colony

6 days in the week, holidays excepted and nine hours each day Ditto

6 days in the week, holidays excepted, and 7 hours in the field or 10 hours in the buildings in each day

Work duration

1s 080 (male) 9d 060(female)

Daily:

Daily: 1s 084 Payable fortnightly

24 cents 080 16 cents 054 Payable weekly

Rs. A. P. Daily---

Wages, minimum rate claimable

Ditto

Ditto

Ditto

Dwelling Medical care Free return passage house and maintewhen nance during claimable sickness Free of Free of After ten charge charge years continuous residence in the colony, 5 of them being under indenture Ditto Ditto Ditto

table 7: comparison of the terms of indenture according to colonies

Adult females of and above the age of 15 years

Same as in Trinidad St. Lucia Ditto Mauritius Males: adults above 18 years adults 15 to 18 adults 12 to 15 Minors 10 to 12 years Females: Adults Male return emigrants above 18 years Male return emigrants 14 to 18 years Natal Adult males of and above the age of 15 years

Grenada

Ditto

Ditto Ditto

Ditto

Ditto

Ditto Ditto

Ditto

6 days in the week, holidays excepted and 8 hours each day

Ditto Ditto

Ditto

Same as in Trinidad Ditto Ditto

Ditto

Ditto

Ditto

Ditto Ditto

Ditto

After ten years residence in the colony, 5 of them being under indenture (contd.)

Ditto Not provided by the colony

Ditto

Males from 11 to 16 years and females from 11 to 14 years Adult males and females from 15 years and upwards. Minor males and females from 10 to 15 years

Adult females of 14 years and upwards

Adult males of 16 years and upwards

Classification of emigrants

Ditto

Ditto

Ditto

Ditto

Work nature

Period of indenture

Ditto

Ditto

Work duration

Wages, minimum rate claimable

Ditto

Ditto

After five years ser­ vice under indenture

Dwelling Medical care Free return passage house and maintewhen nance during claimable sickness Ditto Ditto After five years ser­ vice under indenture

Source: Annual Report on Emigration from the Port of Calcutta to British and Foreign Colonies for 1877-8 by Doctor V. Richards, Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press. 1878.

Surinam

French Colonies

Colony

Table 7 (contd.)

Imperialist Structures

83

level, regulations did not always fulfil the intentions of the colonial authorities. The changes in the legislative stipulations were influ­ enced by the rise of liberal thought, resistance by the labourers to various practical aspects of the scheme and agitation by various interest groups and individuals. As mentioned previously, the ultimate aim was to secure a labour supply and as such changes in the regulations governing the system of indentured labour were geared towards this. At the same time, the number of revisions of the immigration ordi­ nances and the attempts to introduce new stipulations regarding the scheme did not necessarily mean that the conditions of the labourers improved over time. The British Imperial Government made a concerted effort to develop legislation to prevent negative reactions to the system. Despite this, by the end of the nineteenthcentury public opinion against the scheme was developing in various British colonies. Chapter 3 analyses the reaction of the Indian indentured labourers to the logistics of the system and their role in contesting the labour scheme. NOTES 1. Letter from the Government of India to her Majesty’s Secretary of State for India; Proceedings of the Government of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press, 1878, p. 553. 2. The Emigration Agent was ‘an officer appointed by the Government of some place to which emigration may be declared lawful, to conduct emigration at each of the port of embarkation on behalf of such Government’. Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, 1900, p. 502. 3. Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Depart­ ment, Emigration, Calcutta, 1883. 4. Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Depart­ ment, Emigration, Calcutta, 1900, p. 502. These definitions only changed slightly throughout the indentureship period. 5. ‘Results of Major Pitcher’s inquiries into the system of recruiting labour’, Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, February 1883. Major D.G. Pitcher was a Judge, Small Cause Court, Lucknow.

84

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

6. P.C. Emmer, ‘The Meek Hindu: The Recruitment of Indian Inden­ tured Labourers for Service Overseas, 1870-1916’, in P.C. Emmer (ed.), Colonialism and Migration; Indentured Labour Before and After Slavery, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1986, p. 187. 7. Shamshu Deen, Solving East Indian Roots in Trinidad, Freeport: H.E.M. Enterprises, 1994, p. 288. 8. Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Depart­ ment, Emigration, Calcutta, 1900, p. 502. 9. ‘Results of Major Pitcher’s Inquiries into the System of Recruiting Labour’, Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, February 1883. 10. CD. 5192, ‘Report of the Committee on Emigration from India to the Crown Colonies and Protectorates’, Great Britain, June 1910, p. 21. Hereafter referred to as Sanderson Report. The Minutes of Evidence (CD. 5193) and the papers laid before the Committee (CD. 5194) were printed separately. 11. CO 318/252. 12. Letter from the Under Secretary to the Government of India to the Secretary to the Government of the North-West Provinces and Oudh, December 1878, Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, 1879, p. 573. 13. ‘Crown versus Sukhari Das Chamar, Rahmat-ul-lah Sheikh, Gulam Husain Sheikh, Ghazi Mullah’, in the Court of J.M. Pears, Esq., Joint Magistrate, 10 August 1876, Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, 1900. 14. Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Depart­ ment, Emigration, Calcutta, 1898. 15. Statistics taken from the Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, 1898. 16. Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Depart­ ment, Emigration, Calcutta, 1898. 17. ‘Letter to the Secretary of the Government of Bengal, General Department from Babu Kally Coomar Mitter, Hindi Translator to the Government’, Calcutta, 20 December 1899, Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, 1900, p. 60. 18. ‘Letter to the Secretary of the Government of Bengal, General Department from Babu Chaturbhuj Patnaik, Uriya Translator to the Government’, Calcutta, 1 February 1900, Proceedings of the

Imperialist Structures

19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

25.

26. 27.

28. 29. 30.

31. 32. 33. 34.

35. 36.

85

Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, 1900, p. 67. Tinker, p. 137. CO 571/5. ‘Letter from the Government Emigration Agent, Calcutta to the Under Secretary of State, India’, 11 December 1917. Tinker, p. 136. ‘Definition of terms’, Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, 1900, p. 502. ‘Definition of terms’, Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, 1900, p. 502. Proceedings of the Government of Bengal in the Emigration Depart­ ment, Revenue and Agriculture Department, Government of India, 1901, p. 795. Colonial Emigration Form no. 13 – Form of Depot Sickness Report, Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, 1900, p. 166. Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Depart­ ment, Emigration, Calcutta, 1900, p. 525. Colonial Emigration Form no. 14 – Form of Weekly Hospital Report, Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, 1900, p. 166. Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Depart­ ment, Emigration, Calcutta, 1900, p. 525. Deen, p. 231. Interviews with Indian indentured labourers recorded in John La Guerre, ed., Calcutta to Caroni: The East Indians of Trinidad, 2nd edn., St. Augustine: UWI Department of Extra Mural Studies, 1985, p. 193. La Guerre, p. 195. Deen, p. 231. Statement recorded and signed in all Emigrants’ Registers. CO 571/3, ‘Tender of Steam Ship Pursuant to Contract for the Con­ veyance of Indian Emigrants from the East to the West Indies.’ Prior to 1875 individual ships were contracted to transport the labourers to Trinidad, some belonging to Nourse. NOU/5 Memo book, 1875-93, Caird Library, National Maritime Museum, Greenwich. Proceedings of the Government of India, Department of Commerce and Industry, 1910.

86

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

37. CO 571/3, ‘Tender of Steam Ship Pursuant to Contract for the Conveyance of Indian Emigrants from the East to the West Indies.’ 38. CO 571/3, James Nourse Limited to Under Secretary of State, London, December 1915. 39. CO 571/3, ‘Tender of Steam Ship Pursuant to Contract for the Conveyance of Indian Emigrants from the East to the West Indies.’ 40. Ibid. 41. Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Depart­ ment, Emigration, Calcutta, 1905. 42. This decision was reached at a meeting of Surgeons on 5 April 1910. Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, 1911. 43. Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Depart­ ment, Emigration, Calcutta, 1911. 44. Proceedings of the Government of India, Commerce and Industry, Emigration Department, 1916. 45. Annual Reports, ‘Lloyds Registers’ NOU/2. 46. CO 571/3, ‘Tender of Steam Ship Pursuant to Contract for the Conveyance of Indian Emigrants from the East to the West Indies.’ 47. Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Depart­ ment, Emigration, Calcutta, 1868, p. 145. 48. Ibid. 49. It was suggested that another brand be used. Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, 1902. 50. Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Depart­ ment, Emigration, Calcutta, 1902. 51. CD. 5192, Sanderson Report, p. 125. 52. Autobiography of an Indian Indentured Labourer, Munshi Rahman Khan 1874-1972, Delhi: Shipra Publications, 2005. 53. ‘Definition of terms’, Proceedings of the Lieutenant-Governor of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta, 1900, p. 502.

CHAPTER 3

‘Resistance from Within’

Labourers’ Resistance against Indentureship

Introduction In Natal, ‘Smith Batten, manager at Blackburn Estate, complained to the Protector on 28 October 1884 that Madan, who had joined the estate on 29 April 1884, frequently stole poultry, feigned ill­ ness, was absent without reason, and had deserted. During May, June and July, of 92 days, Madan was sick for a total of ten days and absent for twenty; he was absent for eleven days in August; in September he was absent for six days and imprisoned for ten days for theft; released on 19 September 1884, he deserted and was not heard from again.’1 In 1884, Indian indentured labourers in Trinidad openly resisted the dictates of the colonial state which forbade them to celebrate Muharram that year. They decided that Mohurrum was an important aspect of their culture and they went ahead and celebrated although they were specifically told not to.2 In 1871, approximately 413 Indian labourers who had com­ pleted their contracts in Natal returned to India on the Red Riding Hood and Umvoti. When they arrived in India they made several reports to the Protector of Emigrants, about the state of poverty in which they lived in Natal. They complained about being flogged, given insufficient food and clothing allowances, inadequate medi­ cal care and lack of opportunities whereby they could report their conditions and get their grievances redressed. In that same year, about 9,400 labourers signed a petition in Mauritius protesting against penal clauses of the Mauritius Immigration Act. In 1913,

88

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

on a plantation in Berbice, British Guiana, indentured labourers were told by their manager Mr. Smith that they had to go out to work on a holiday. Mr. Smith told them that he would give them the holidays later on. The labourers ignored him and stopped others who were inclined to go to work. They took their holiday regardless of their manager’s dictates. These are all examples of resistance by indentured labourers in various territories where the indentureship system existed. In fact, in all the territories where indentureship existed, indentured labourers were protesting in some form against the labour scheme. Undoubtedly, resistance was an inherent part of the indentureship system. The extent to which they resisted and the actual form of resis­ tance varied according to territory but the common factor is the innate need to protest against whatever they perceived as unfair and iniquitous. Thus, Indian indentured labourers gave them­ selves agency within the colonial structure. They were certainly not the meek, submissive labourers that the colonial authorities would have liked them to be and maybe even expected them to be. While the British imperial government promoted its imperialist interests through its regulation of the indentureship system and its control over the labourers, the labourers did not always show signs of uncontested acceptance of imperialist policies. In fact, indentured labourers in all the different colonies devised ways to contest their subjugated situations, thereby undermining the very foundation of imperialism at some levels. Throughout the indentureship period, labourers were engaged in deliberate acts to undermine authority. They refused to conform to certain demands made by the colonial authorities and were pre­ pared to wrestle with aspects of the system, which they perceived as threatening or iniquitous. Resistance by the labourers themselves were evident in all the territories where Indian indentureship existed. Though the actual activities differed in some cases and the labourers played different roles in contesting the system, their defiance and confrontations with the colonials are visible sign of their refusal to accept colonial dictates in all its elements. Their activities of resistance, when not kept under cover by the colonials, were instrumental in drawing attention to the differences between

‘Resistance from Within’

89

the theoretical framework of the labour scheme and the reality of its existence in the colonies. This chapter looks at the nature of the resistance which came out of the British West Indies, Fiji, Mauritius and South Africa. It analyses the extent to which this contestation was an organized effort or a more subtle attempt to oppose some of the policies governing the lives of the immigrants and discusses the forms of opposition that occurred. It situates the indentured labourers in the history of the abolition of the Indian indentureship system and evaluates the extent to which their activities contributed towards the general inefficiency and ineffectiveness of the scheme and to the final abolition process. It gives agency to a group of people who were always perceived as inferior by the colonials. It eradicates the myth of the labourers as meek and docile individuals ready to fully accept the dictates of the colonial state.

Subaltern Resistance Ideas of resistance by subaltern groups are not new in the study of history and the reconstruction of the history of different groups in various parts of the world has been heavily influenced by notions of domination and subordination. It is predictable that themes of oppression and coercion are followed by notions of contestation and resistance. It is also inevitable that the group most dominated over in history has been the lower classes or the subalterns. This would explain why in recent times much of the writings on the history of suppressed people have been attempts to ‘give a voice’ to the subalterns or to show that they were not merely willing to accept their suppressed positions. In the history of the Caribbean, one of the most notable examples of resistance can be seen during the period of African enslavement when slave revolts predominated throughout the Caribbean colonies. Though many of them did not attain the level of the Haitian Revolution, which actually ousted European rule, revolts definitely represented a significant form of contestation to the oppressive rule of the colonials.3 The history of serfdom in Europe shows a similar situation of resistance to some types of

90

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

domination. Though the serfs were technically not slaves, at the same time, they were not entirely free individuals and they occu­ pied the lowest rung of the socio-economic ladder. They were legally bound to work in a place of servitude in return for housing and other ‘benefits’.4 Another example of resistance against domi­ nance can be seen with the Indian peasantry. The historiography shows contestation against colonialism and against those who enforced dominant ideologies such as the British Raj, the Indian Civil Servant or the zamindars. When compared to serfdom and to the enslavement of African, the Indian peasants were compara­ tively better off, at least in theory. Some of the richer peasants owned land, some of them were landlords and some of them were rent-collectors working with the Imperial Government. However, the greater part of the Indian agricultural workers was low class peasants, often landless, who cultivated land which was owned by the colonial government or a class comprising the upper echelons of the peasantry such as the zamindars and talukdars. They existed in an unofficial system similar in many ways to that of the serfs and to serfdom in Europe.5 The indentureship system was just another type of labour sys­ tem on trial in an imperialist world. Indian indentured labourers were neither slaves nor serfs but were instead a class of labourers whose legal and social condition placed them somewhere in the middle of these two categories of labour. Theoretically, indentured labourers were free labourers, not the property of the planters. In these labour systems, the labourers became ‘the victims of authority and coercion’ not so much because of their economic vulnerability but because of their immobility. According to Eric Hobsbawm ‘their roots are in the land and the homestead, and there they must stay like trees, or rather like sea-anemones or other sessile aquatic animals which settle down after a phase of youth­ ful mobility’.6 What was common to these systems of labour is the fact that the dominating power – whether this was the colonial state, the planters, the masters, the landlords, the rent collector or the European imperial power – had almost total control over the labour force in one way or the other. Thus, dominance at all levels can be seen quite clearly throughout the history of these systems of

‘Resistance from Within’

91

labour. Power was vested in the hands of those with the resources to prolong domination. Economic power bred political domina­ tion, which was very often accompanied by attempts at ideological control. It should come as no surprise then, that there are many examples of resistance to various forms of control in the history of labour. Indeed, there are many instances where suppressed people have attempted to contest the dominant power in one form or the other. Whether or not this contestation was recorded or reconstructed is an entirely different matter. This has been one of the major problems in the reconstruction of this aspect of labour history. Instances of resistance were sometimes too sporadic and indi­ vidualistic to record. As James C. Scott noted, ‘If they are open they are rarely collective and if they are collective, they are rarely open’.7 They were not seen as important or relevant in the culture of domination. It is often the case that the dominant power has the ability and means to construct the history of a country. The colo­ nial elite did everything in their power to sweep acts of resistance by indentured labourers under the carpet. Also, indentureship came in the aftermath of African enslavement and British imperial powers had to ensure that the system did not visibly appear similar to African enslavement, in order to appease British humanist sen­ sitivity, especially as the British Anti-Slavery Society was keeping a watchful eye on the labour scheme.

Cultural Resistance in the Caribbean Listen, oh Indian, listen to the story of us émigrés,

The émigrés who cry constantly, tears flowing from their eyes.

When we left the ports of Calcutta and Bombay,

Brother left sister, mother left daughter.

Indian indentured labourers on the sugar plantations of British Guiana were familiar with the above folk song which was actually a part of their cultural heritage. This song and others became ‘songs of resistance’ with which the labourers used to protest their trans­ portation and settlement in a country thousands of miles away

92

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

from their homeland. In fact, labourers in all the colonies where Indians migrated under the indentureship scheme were accus­ tomed to using culture as a means of protest against their everyday situations. The methods and extent to which culture was used may have differed according to territory but in many instances cultural resistance became an everyday feature of the labourers’ lifestyle. In the imperialist framework, the culture of the colonized is often suppressed or deemed to be inferior in one way or the other. The key aspects of imperialism are domination and control and these are often extended beyond economics. According to James C. Scott, Hegemony may be used to refer to the entire complex of social domi­ nation…. The main idea is that the ruling class dominates not only the means of physical production but the means of symbolic production as well. Its control over the material forces of production is replicated, at the level of ideas, in its control over the ideological ‘sectors’ of society – culture, religion, education, and the media – in a manner that allows it to disseminate those values that reinforce its position.8

Thus, during the indentureship period, culture was one way by which labourers’ were controlled, though it was not as visible as the mechanisms of legal control which were enforced. It is no surprise that labourers sought to resist this control and consequently, resis­ tance was evident in the private domain. It was visible within the household, family and village life and away from the ‘colonial gaze’ where the labourers felt sufficiently comfortable to express them­ selves freely. Resistance was most evident in the cultural lifestyle of the Indian labourers and cultural resistance became an inher­ ent part of the indentureship landscape. Thus, culture was used, ‘consciously or unconsciously, effectively or not, to resist and/or change the dominant political, economic and/or social structure’.9 To a certain extent the plantation economy, itself facilitated cul­ tural resistance by the indentured labourers. This idea stems from the fact that the immigrants were housed together or shared com­ mon facilities at the Calcutta depot, on board the ship and on the plantations. This arrangement provided the foundation whereby some kind of ‘cultural solidarity’ was allowed space to germinate.10

‘Resistance from Within’

93

Hence, when the indentured labourers ‘settled’ on the plantations, their everyday lifes encompassed a diluted form of the traditions and practices they were familiar with in India. Added to this, attempts were made to placate the indentured labour force by the grant of certain concessions so as to condition them into becom­ ing a rather well-trained and compliant group. Hence, Indian indentured labourers were permitted to reconstruct diluted ver­ sions of their cultural identities in the colonies. Clem Seecharan pointed out, East Indian rituals were encouraged by planters who saw them as a prop to the plantation system…. The survival of these festivals which afforded the opportunity of physical relaxation or wholesome amusement meant that the concept of India would not be divorced from the East Indians. A sense of belonging would induce the immigrants to reindenture.11

Domination was reflected in the extent to which the colonizers were able to control religion, education, the media and culture. This was possible in a situation where a sense of cultural supe­ riority was established and where the culture of the ruling class was perceived by the ruling class as superior in all aspects, while the culture of the Indian labourers was tolerated. Consequently, cultural traditions and practices of Indian indentured labourers were never oppressed unless of course they were perceived as anti­ colonial and as a threat to the colonial state and the peace of the colony. When this occurred, the colonial officials did not hesitate to curtail cultural activities. At the same time, these practices were not openly sanctioned by the ruling class but sufficient flexibil­ ity was given with respect to culture so that the labourers would not have any added reason to be dissatisfied with their conditions and position in the society. Thus, while cultural concessions were meant to make the labour force a more contented and compli­ ant group, at the same time these concessions served as a basis whereby cultural solidarity was established. In the case of the indentured labourers, cultural resistance can be seen in the cultural resilience which occurred. The majority of the indentured labourers did not succumb to the culture of the dominant class in the society but instead chose to perpetuate the

94

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

culture that they transported to the colonies. Lomarsh Roopnarine notes, The indentured servants relied on their own cultural resilience – in the forms of feast and festival – and adaptation to deal with the coercive regi­ men of indentureship. This cultural resilience and adaptation appeared in dress, drama, ritual, religious beliefs, and so on.… Indentured servants chose certain cultural expressions and practices to meet their felt needs while at the same time they were reluctant to accept or understand west­ ern ways….12

In some colonies, labourers resisted the blatant attempts made to convert them to Christianity, the religion of the colonizers. In Trinidad, for example, by 1891 only 12 per cent of the total Indian population13 belonged to the various Christian religions in the colony while 88 per cent of the total Indian population contin­ ued to practice religions transported from India; Hinduism, Islam and Buddhism.14 Another example can be seen with the cultural tradition/practices of the Hindus who made up the bulk of the indentured labouring population. In Trinidad and British Guiana, the Hindu labourers adopted the Ramayana tradition into their everyday lives and this tradition became an important aspect of Caribbean Hinduism. The fact that the Hindu population chose to propagate a tradition based on a body of literature in which the main protagonist was exiled from his home gives some insight into the manner in which they perceived themselves. Hindu labourers identified themselves with the character Ram and saw themselves as exiled from their motherland, waiting the day when they would return. This belief itself shows the extent to which the labourers did not happily adjust to their circumstances in the colonies. While cultural traditions dealt with or emphasized the socio­ political conditions of the indentured labourers, culture was only consciously used for political purposes on rare occasions. One of the most visible examples of this was seen in 1884 with the Hosay Riots in Trinidad when both free and indentured Indians in Trinidad openly resisted the dictates of the colonial authorities in an attempt to celebrate Muharram or Hosay. Colonial Govern­ ment’s regulations stipulated that Indian indentured immigrants

‘Resistance from Within’

95

were not permitted to enter the towns of San-Fernando or Portof-Spain when celebrating the annual festival of Hosay. They were not allowed to use sticks and other offensive weapons. Torches or fire sticks were not allowed on any high or public road and they had to obtain licenses in order to conduct their processions. As a relatively large number of Indians normally gathered for the Hosay procession, the colonial state was concerned that they did not disturb the peace of the colony. However, on 31 October 1884, the immigrants ignored these colonial regulations and attempted to make their way to the town of San-Fernando. The colonial police opened fire on the procession and twenty-one Indians were killed.15 A number of significant points can be made regarding this kind of resistance. First, it shows how one aspect of Indian cul­ ture became entwined with the politics in the colony; although the indentured labourers may not have been politically inclined, some of the instigators and participants had ulterior motives when they resisted the colonial government in Trinidad. An enquiry into the riots noted that the Indians were joined by Creoles who may have been involved in the Canboulay riots of 1881.16 Second, it shows the extent to which the colonial authorities in Trinidad were threatened by any signs of unity between the Creoles and the Indi­ ans in Trinidad and the various attempts to control the labourers on the island. There was the use of legislation by the government to control the Muharram Festival. For example, Ordinance no. 9 of 1882 stipulated that headmen were to be chosen from each plantation or village. These persons would ‘regulate, control and take charge of any procession’.17 This ordinance also prohibited the use of hakka sticks or any forms of weapons.18 The Administra­ tor of the colony claimed that the Colonial Government did not want to interfere with the religious rites connected with the Hosay festival but regulations were necessary for the sole object of ensur­ ing order throughout the colony. He noted that the immigrants, ‘Cannot, on the ground of religion, claim a right to enter the towns of Port-of-Spain or San-Fernando, or proceed along the high roads of the colony without the prior permission of the District Magis­ trate’.19

96

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

The authorities took extra care in ensuring that the Indians knew what the law stipulated and stipendiary magistrates, planta­ tion owners, managers and overseers as well as prominent Indians and other individuals were required to inform the labourers of the new legislation. The colonial authorities also used visible forms of control, thereby ensuring that a body of armed Marines and police officers would be in clear sight of the processions.20 In the end though, the Hosay riots demonstrates the blatant refusal of the Indian labouring population to conform to colonial domination and shows the way in which resistance was maturing in Trinidad. A proportion of the labouring population had petitioned the Admin­ istrator of the colony asking for leniency of the new legislation so that they could conduct their religious obligation. However, their petition was rejected on the grounds that the laws were necessary in order to maintain order.21 When one form of protests did not yield any results the Indians openly defied the colonial authorities. When cultural resistance reached this level of collective protests it caught the attention of the colonial authorities who were forced to recognize that there was space for the labourers to become an organized group. While the labourers were not attempting to overthrow colonial rule they were openly resisting the colonial authorities. It was at this point that resistance by the Indians gained the attention of the colonial government in the colony and was brought to the notice of the British Imperial Government. The Colonial Office delegated Sir Henry Norman, the Governor of Jamaica, to Trinidad in order to conduct an enquiry into ‘this lamentable occurrence and the causes which led to it’.22 The Gov­ ernment of India was notified of the situation by the Protector of Immigrants in Trinidad and it requested an investigation into the riot and additional information on the situation. The Protector in turn forwarded copies of the report of Capt. A.W. Baker, the Inspector Commander of Police in Trinidad, to India.23 The Brit­ ish Anti-Slavery and Aborigines Protection Society was notified of the incident. The Times (London) published an article entitled ‘The Massacre of Coolies at Trinidad’ on 28 November 1884 which discussed the relationship between the depression in the sugar market and the discontentment of the indentured labourers in

‘Resistance from Within’

97

Trinidad.24 It stated that the depression of sugar markets resulted in an increase in task work, which in turn amplified the discon­ tentment of the labourers. In December of the same year, the Madras Mail published extracts of the article which was carried in the Times (London).25 This is one of the first instances where an Indian newspaper was covering an incident regarding indentured labourers in Trinidad specifically. In British Guiana, there was a stronger sense of defiance via Indian folk tradition. In fact, British Guianese folk songs spoke of the immigration process from the time of recruitment to life on the plantations. For example, one song expressed ideas of being fooled by the recruiters: Oh recruiter, your heart is deceitful,

Your speech is full of lies!

Tender may be your voice, articulate and seemingly logical,

But it is all used to defame and destroy

The good names of people.26

The negative experiences at the depot in Calcutta were told from one generation to another through the folk tradition. Thus, children of indentured labourers, born in the colony and having never experienced the immigration process, were still aware of the conditions of immigration via the folk songs. One song stated: When we reach Calcutta, our miseries increased.

We were stripped of all our beautiful clothes,

Rosary beads and scared threads.

Bengali rags decorated us now.

The sadhu’s hair was shaved,

And Sadhu, Dom, Chamar, and Bhangi

All were thrown together in a room.27

Another song noted: They beat us with a cane, lifting us over their heads,

They threw us on the floor;

In abusive language they called us sala and other names.28

98

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

In British Guiana, there was a strong sense of loss of tradition, culture and family affiliation under indenture. Indians decried the immigration process and expressed a certain degree of bitterness on having become an indentured labourer. These ideas were passed on for generations so that the resentment of the labour scheme was perpetuated in the society. One song stated: Listen, oh Indian, listen to the story of us émigrés,

The émigrés who cry constantly, tears flowing from their eyes.

When we left the ports of Calcutta and Bombay,

Brother left sister, mother left daughter.

In the deep love of the mother country we cried;

Water flowed from our eyes.

The villagers were simple, and they faced the meanest of mean people

For whom they were no match.

Painful is our story, choking is our voice;

When brother sold brother all shame was gone,

The mothers were looted.

In need of a few rains, we became beggars.29

Others expressed a deep awareness of oppression and bitterness and spoke of the Indians’ low position in the plantation society. The immigrants saw themselves as victims under the control of the white colonial authorities. And they regretted this low status in the colony. One song said: We came to Dem’ra,

With the name ‘coolie’,

Why should we be called coolies,

We who were born in the clans and families of seers and saints?30

Another showed anger and frustration with the state of control exercised over Indians and of the ‘mechanisms of control’. It men­ tioned the jail, the police station and the court house – physical representations of the legal aspect of the immigration system: It drives one out of his mind,

British Guiana drives us out of our minds.

In Rowra there is the court house,

‘Resistance from Within’

99

In Camesma is the prison.

It drives one crazy,

It is British Guiana.

The court house in Wakenaam,

The police station in Parika

The prison in Georgetown,

Drive you crazy.31

Thus, the folk traditions told stories of resentment and frus­ tration on having become a girmitiya. The folk songs expressed bitterness at the life on the plantations and dissatisfaction with the colonial authorities, plantation masters and overseers. One song referred to the ‘capitalist fat cats’ and stated: These capitalist fat cats have become our masters.

They now do what comes to their minds.

They made us clear the whole jungle,

They made us cut cane, dig trenches,

Harshly are we driven to build their places, to dig their canals,

And to build their big city, Georgetown.

And we wander street to street, remaining beggars.32

Another song describes the working conditions on the planta­ tions and speaks about the physical punishment that was meted out to labourers. Given that theoretically, physical punishment was not encouraged for fear the system would be perceived as too similar to African enslavement, it is interesting that the folk songs talk about the whips and chains: On one side are sitting Pama and Pulma;

On the other side Hulkar.

Pama said to Pulma, Wake up all the Kafris.33

‘How much work do you have for them?’ asked the boss.

‘To cut Number 20 field.’

The Kafris were hardly sleeping when they were awakened.

They awoke startled, and Pulma reported,

‘I have shown them their way at 5 a.m.,

To cut the cane in Number 20 field.’

With cutlass in their hands the Kafris ate half-boiled

100

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

rice and plantain.

Reaching Number 20 they crossed trenches after trenches,

full of alligators,

And began to work.

So the whips and chains began to pour on them.

What’s next, oh Lord?

Our bread is snatched away too.34

This sense of acrimony carried over from one generation to the next via the folk songs/traditions. Consequently, Indian indentured labourers in British Guiana, like their counterparts in Trinidad, maintained cultural traditions and art forms, which remained quite distinct in the colonial society. Their resistance to the labour scheme and the plantation environment was manifested in their determination to maintain cultural traditions as far as was possible in the host society. In some territories such as Jamaica, St. Lucia and Grenada, it was more difficult to maintain forms of Indian culture mainly because of the low number of labour­ ers in relation to the general population who immigrated to those colonies. Additionally, the labourers were distributed throughout the colonies, with very small numbers on individual plantations. This resulted in inter-racial marriages with non-Indians within the society and speeded up the creolization process. Eventually there was an almost complete disintegration of Indian cultural forms in those territories. In Trinidad, resistance via folk traditions were not as strong as in British Guiana, but in both colonies Indian indentured labourers persistently maintained various aspects of their cultural heritage both as an attempt to resist colonial policies and to re-establish lives in a territory so far away from ‘Mother India’.

Plantation Resistance in the Caribbean On the 12th February certain complaints had been put forward by the immigrants … and arrangements were made for the transfer of a few immigrants to another estate. The transfer was objected to. On the 6th March the indentured immigrants on the plantation refused to go to

‘Resistance from Within’

101

work, and on the 7th of March they refused to allow the unindentured labourers to work on the estate.35

While the majority of the indentured labourers immigrated gen­ erally based on rational economic behaviour the logistics of the labour scheme did not always live up to their expectations and as such the labourers expressed discontentment with their situation. The girmitiyas were aware of their status in the colony and were unwilling to accept certain aspects of their condition. Resistance on the plantations in the Caribbean is an indicator of the attempts they made to defy the indentureship system. Many of the activi­ ties undertaken by indentured labourers which can be interpreted as acts of resistance were localized, unstructured, sporadic and individualistic in nature. Many required little or no planning or coordination and were for the most part, spontaneous acts based on individual rather than collective behavioural patterns. This can be seen with the cases of desertion for example. An immigrant became a deserter when ‘he has been absent for seven days from his plantation without having obtained leave from his employer’.36 This always posed a problem for planters and colonial authorities in the West Indian colonies. In Trinidad, desertion appeared to be a general problem which the constabulary dealt with throughout the indentureship period. For example, in 1916 it reported 212 cases of desertion. In this year, the constabulary also noted that 1,138 indentured labourers were escorted back to various estates but it is difficult to distinguish between labourers who were listed as deserters and those who were escorted back to the estates. These may have been two different types of cases dealt with by the constabulary.37 Cases of desertion were also high on certain estates. For example, on the St. Augustine Estate there were nineteen cases of desertion for the year 1890. Fazal, an indentured labourer stated: Plenty a dem run away Dey hiding nuh Going all about De driver come sometime gi de trouble

102

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

If e tell watchman See de dat man Any hour see de you E hiding de night E no go to work.38

Cases of desertion were common on estates but these were undertaken by individuals rather than by a group. The same can be seen with cases of indolence, absence from work, assault and so on. These occurred on an individual basis and were not pre-planned. Planters were always faced with these activities and in many cases production was slowed down to some extent. For example, on the Woodbrook Estate out of a total of 56 indentured labourers there were approximately 10 cases before the Magistrate Court. Two immigrants were given seven days hard labour by the Magistrate for leaving the mill without permission. On the Florissant Estate, 30 per cent of the indentured labourers had cases pending in the Police Court. Twenty-five per cent of these cases resulted from the labourers’ refusal to do the allotted work. Table 8 shows the num­ ber of cases pending in the Magistrate court for the year 1893. It also gives the reasons for prosecution of indentured labourers for specific estates. Cases like these continued to occur in Trinidad until the offi­ cial end of the indentureship system. It appears that the colonial officials had a particular problem with breach of the immigration ordinance. There were many instances where indentured labourtable 8: prosecution of indentured labourers, trinidad, 189339 Estate Brechan [sic] Castle Estate Woodbrook Estate

Nos. 45 10

Florissant Estate

6

Exchange Estate

10

Reasons Habitual idling; absence or refusal to do work Refusal to work, leaving the estate without permission Refusal to work; attacked the assistant manager Desertion

‘Resistance from Within’

103

table 9: breach of contracts by indentured labourers, trinidad, 1898-190840 Year 1898 1903 1906 1908

Total number of convictions 3,081 3,833 3,574 4,031

Cases of breach of ordinance 944 1,730 1,659 1,869

% of total number of cases 31.0 45.0 45.4 46.3

ers breached their contracts as well as the ordinance itself. Table 9 shows the extent to which this occurred for specific years. In 1916 there were 487 cases where labourers were charged for breach of indenture and 53 cases for breach of the Immigration Ordinance.41 In the two years following 1916, the number of cases decreased but indentured labourers continued to breach both their indenture and the Immigration Ordinance. In 1917, there were 49 cases of breach of indenture and 17 cases of breach of the Immigration Ordinance.42 In 1918, there were 91 cases in which indentured labourers were charged with breach of indenture.43 A violation of the indenture contract could automatically be inter­ preted as a breach of the Immigration Ordinance except that the official reports have listed the two as separate cases. It appears that cases of a breach of the Immigration Ordinance did not include those which violated the indenture contract. In Trinidad, there were only sporadic cases where indentured labourers left the plantations in large groups to make complaints to the Protector of Immigrants. One such example occurred in 1904 when approximately 50 to 60 immigrants left one of the estates of the Colonial Company in the district of Naparima with the inten­ tion of proceeding to San Fernando where they could complain to the Protector.44 As mentioned previously, the law did not permit the free movement of indentured labourers outside the plantation hence the reason why collective behaviour was simply not a com­ mon occurrence. The group of immigrants mentioned above were arrested and subsequently imprisoned. Immigrants were aware of the fate which awaited them if they organized themselves; prob­ ably one of the reasons why group resistance was not common.

104

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Throughout the Caribbean colonies, probably with the excep­ tion of British Guiana, acts of resistance were mostly spontaneous, individualistic and remained at a localized level. First, opportu­ nities for collective behaviour were curtailed by the plantation owners and the colonial authorities. The logistics of the indentureship system did not allow the labourers much room to organize themselves into collective bodies as indentured labourers were not permitted to move out of the plantations and about the colony without permission from planters, managers or overseers. In colo­ nies such as Trinidad, labourers were required to have a pass with them once they were outside of the plantation. These passes could only be obtained by the plantation owner, manager or overseer. If the indentured labourers were found outside of the plantations without a pass in their possession then they would face the law – fines or imprisonment were the penalties imposed for this crime. Also, the workload left little time for extra-curricular activi­ ties. In fact, it was imperative that the colonial authorities did not encourage the growth or development of any form of identity or solidarity which could threaten the state’s foundation in any manner. In the case of the Indian indentured labourers, ‘it was important that the indentured immigrants be separated from the remainder of the population since solidarity tended to make manipulation difficult’.45 For this reason, it became crucial that strong leadership and group organization did not develop amongst the immigrant population. Hence, the growth of leadership was curbed from birth and checks were placed on many individuals who were inclined towards the formation of organizations. The panchayat system for example, was viewed with suspicious eyes and not given much room for development because it presented a forum whereby the views and issues of the immigrants could be discussed. The colonial authorities could do without such forums if the colonial framework could continue to exist with as little issues as possible. To some extent the indentured labourers themselves were able to rise above this impediment with the formation of informal linkages at a local (plantation) level. The seeds of these links were sown at the Calcutta coolie depot where potential emigrants were

‘Resistance from Within’

105

housed together. They later received an impetus for germination during the journey to the colonies. Some authors have referred to this as the Jahaji Bhai relationship – a feeling of brotherhood aris­ ing out of the shared sufferings of the Indian labourers. To some extent, this feeling fuelled the resistance movement by indentured labourers as some individuals received ‘moral support’ from their fellow jahajis and was thus more inclined towards protests in one form or the other. For example, six leaders were identified (out of eight individuals) who instigated a strike on the Petit Morne estate in Trinidad in 1883. Of these six labourers, three were shipmates and had shared the experience of the journey to Trinidad aboard the Scottish Admiral. Similarly, in 1891 five of the six leaders of a strike on the Bonne Aventure estate were identified. Four of these labourers had arrived on the colony, on the ship Bruce. In 1895, three out of the four leaders held responsible for a strike on the Garden Estate had arrived on the ship Main.46 Also, on the Caratal Estate approximately 40 indentured labourers refused to do any work on the day that an indentured labourer from their estate had to appear in court for a matter pertaining to assault of an estate manager. The labourers defied the plantation manager and proceeded to San Fernando where they gathered outside the courthouse.47 The particular type of solidarity that emerged amongst the indentured labourers, or the links that were estab­ lished amongst them, should not be underestimated. Although these did not result in formal organizations, they either provided an opportunity for or encouraged various methods of resistance. Second, indentured labourers were reacting to immediate con­ ditions rather than questioning the entire indentureship system. For the duration of the indentureship system the labourers were engaged in alleviating their everyday living or working conditions rather than achieving long-term or extensive goals. They were confined to particular grievances rather than widespread issues and for this reason acts of resistance tended to occur at a localized level. Activities such as desertion, strikes and breach of contract represented individual efforts to eradicate the immediate prob­ lems with which the individual was faced; to alleviate everyday living conditions and to get away from the situation temporarily.

106

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Grievances with wages can be used as an illustration of this. Inden­ tured labourers wanted better everyday living conditions and they believed that higher wages could give them this. Generally they felt that the value of their labour was not high enough and most of the complaints lodged with the District Sub-Immigration Agent or the Magistrates pertained to wages. While labourers on many estates throughout the colony had serious problems with the wages that they were receiving they tended to complain as individuals or on behalf of specific groups of labourers on the estates. Hardly ever did the indentured labourers come together to lodge a general complaint on behalf of all indentured labourers in a specific estate much less in the colony. Third, many acts of resistance were emotionally stimulated and occurred impulsively mainly when the indentured labourers felt that there was an infringement on their customary rights. The immigrants came from a pre-modern society where customary obligations occupied an important space in their everyday activi­ ties but they were now placed in a situation where contractual obligations were expected to supersede customary ones. This resulted in a certain amount of conflict with those in authority. There was a need for labourers to understand that the logistics of the indentureship system placed importance on contractual obligations and customary rights were delegated to an almost oblivious position. However, it was difficult for some labourers to adjust to this concept and as such there were cases where inden­ tured labourers refused to conform to what was expected of them. For example, one indentured labourer on the Woodbrook Estate in Trinidad refused to go to work on the grounds that he was going to cook his food.48 Others put their customary obligations in front and stayed away from work so that they could visit sick relatives on other estates, and so on. When this occurred their activities were recorded as ‘desertion’, ‘unlawful’ absent from work and ‘wil­ ful’ indolence. The colonial authorities did not see the customary obligations of the labourers in any positive light and the labourers had difficul­ ties in adjusting to the fact that contractual obligations had to take precedence over everything else. They were forced to adjust to an

‘Resistance from Within’

107

environment where the concept of time was of utmost importance. In the pre-modern society the use of time was based on their own understanding of customary rights. However, in the modern soci­ ety time became an important aspect of contractual labour and the indentured labourers resisted the vigorous implementation of time on the plantations. Another significant point to note regarding resistance by inden­ tured labourers is the fact that resistance was not always passive. In fact, resistance was often characterized by violent acts directed towards those in authority or those who represented oppression in whatever form. In the case of the indentured labourers violent acts were still not geared towards questioning the system per se and in most cases they were not thoroughly pre-planned, though prevalent in the colonies. Violence was most often seen when the indentured labourers directly confronted the planters or the Euro­ peans in the society, quite often when there were strikes on the plantations for example. In Trinidad, in 1882 there was direct confrontation between Indian labourers and the authorities on the Cedar Hill Estate and in 1884 on the Endeavour Estate. It appears that strikes, accom­ panied by violence were a regular part of the Trinidad plantation society. The Protector of Immigrants in Trinidad noted that, During the years 1882, 1883 and 1884, strikes of a very serious nature occurred on the estates of the Colonial Company in Naparima and at ‘El Socorro’, one of their main plantations about four miles from Port-ofSpain, and also at ‘Laurel Hill’, in the district of Tacariqua [sic]. In these strikes armed police had to be moved on to the estates to restore order.49

In August 1890, a strike of some importance occurred on the Golconda Estate, an estate belonging to the Colonial Company. According to the Protector of Immigrants, In this case, after careful enquiry, the task given was found to be exces­ sive, and it was ordered to be reduced. The immigrants, however, being in a discontented state, were not satisfied with this concession, and asked to be put on ‘time work’ of nine hours a day, as provided under the terms of the contract made with them in India. This the estate authorities at once did but the spirit of discontent had now become difficult to control….50

108

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

The Protector of Immigrants noted that strikes occurred mainly on estates belonging to the Colonial Company and rarely on plan­ tations on which the proprietor resided and managed the estate or in cases where the planting attorney lived on the estate with his family (as on Brechin Castle and Orange Grove). This suggests that immigrants on the estates of the Colonial Company either existed (perceived or real) under conditions relatively worse than on other plantations. As mentioned previously, even when acts of resistance were prevalent in the colonies and took the form of violence these acts were not planned and the indentured labourers were not questioning the system. While this deep feeling of resentment was also seen in the atti­ tude of the British Guiana labourers, these labourers demonstrated a more aggressive attitude than that of the labourers in Trinidad. As in the case of Trinidad, these feelings were manifested on the plantations through high cases of desertion; from 1881 to 1890, there was an average of 517 deserters per annum.51 Similar to their Trinidad counterparts, the Indian labourers in British Guiana were also discontented because of the wages they received. For example, labourers on the Chateau Margot plantation complained to the Stipendiary Magistrate of the East Coast District about their wages. In the Bel Air estate, the shovel gang lodged a complaint with the District Sub-Immigration Agent.52 An inquiry by a Stipendiary Magistrate in Berbice gives a clear example of indentured labourers’ protests against planters’ dic­ tates. It started, On Tuesday the 28th January, Mr. Smith changed his mind about the holidays as he found he had some planting to be done, and ordered the Indentured immigrants to go to work, and telling them he would give them holidays later on. The Indentured immigrants did not go to work and some seemed inclined but a certain number of them prevented the others from going.’53

In fact, violent strikes were more common in British Guiana than in Trinidad. During the period 1886 to 1889, the following number of strikes as shown in Table 10. In 1869, indentured labourers assaulted an overseer on the

‘Resistance from Within’

109

table 10: strikes by indentured labourers in british guiana, 1886-8954 Year

No. of strikes

1886 1887 1888 1889

31 15 42 12

Leonora Plantation and in that year similar cases were reported on the Chateau Margot and Success Plantations.55 Direct confronta­ tion with planters often resulted in death as seen at Devonshire Castle in Guyana in September 1872.56 Confrontation with over­ seers, managers or the British Guiana colonial authorities was also common during the tadjah processions of the Muharram celebrations and was often spontaneous acts. For example, two indentured labourers of Plantation Devonshire Castle were charged with assaulting the manager during a tadjah procession. Under closer inspection of the case it appears that the labourers may have felt that their celebration was not given sufficient respect by the planter and as such retaliated in that given situation. This case involved indentured labourers Leeree and Bahal who were charged with assaulting the manager Robert Bunbury. It appears that Bunbury refused to dismount from his horse on approaching the tadjah procession and he claimed that he did not have to do so upon passing three other processions. Bahal then offered to take his horse bridle and lead him past the tadjah but he refused and struck Bahal, saying that Bahal attempted to back the horse into a nearby trench. The Magistrate later dismissed the case.57 In Jamaica, acts of resistance were very similar to those in Trinidad and quite a significant number of indentured labourers attempted to resist the system in various ways. As Verene Shep­ herd noted, Indian immigrants in Jamaica employed a variety of intransigent actions to register their dissatisfaction with their status as indentured servants and with the failure of employers to honour all the terms of their contract.

110

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

These included day-to-day protest such as malingering, ‘wilful’ indolence, outright refusal to work, constant requests for leave of absence, desertion and ‘unlawful’ (short-term) absence from work. All these forms of pro­ tests were deemed by employers as breaches of the immigration law and were punishable by fines and imprisonment.58

During the indentureship period, numerous cases against indentured labourers were brought to the attention of both the Protector of Immigrants as well as the Resident Magistrates. Table 11 gives a breakdown of the types of activities carried out by indentured labourers in Jamaica for the year 1914: Like the rest of the Caribbean, violent protests were often a direct result of protests against the low wages or non-payment of wages and demands for higher wages. These protests were often sporadic, unplanned and did not attain an island-wide level. Indians in St. Vincent reacted in the same manner as their counterparts in other Caribbean colonies. Desertion and breach of contract might have been less common as in the case of Trinidad and British Guiana, but similar to these two colonies, there were sporadic cases where the indentured labourers protested as a group. For example, in 1882, approximately fifty Indian labourers from the Argyle Estate marched to the office of the Protector of Immigrants and the Lieutenant-Governor eight miles away in the capital city. table 11: acts of resistance by indenture labourers, jamaica, 191459 Patterns of Resistance

‘Willful’ Indolence ‘Unlawful’ absence from work Desertion Assault Threatening/Abusive language Negligence/Property damage Refusal to perform work Breach of hospital regulations

Before the Protector and Inspector of Immigrants 167 93 32 19 12 1 31 14

Before Resident Magistrates 68 20 14 21 22 5 22 10

‘Resistance from Within’

111

Theirs was a peaceful march aimed at presenting their complaints to those in higher authority. Not surprisingly, the labourers were accused of leaving the estate without prior permission and on arrival in the town, the ringleaders were promptly arrested for such.60 Otherwise, resistance against the system occurred only on a localized sporadic basis by individual labourers. Sometimes, acts of violence on Caribbean plantations caught the attention of the Indian nationalists in India and forced the Government of India to pay attention to the situation of Indians in the British West Indies in general. A good example of this is the case of British Guiana and the Rose Hills riots. In April 1913, the Secretary of State for the colonies presented a paper to the House of Commons on the Rose Hill riots in British Guiana.61 In 1913, Surendra Nath Banerji raised the topic in the Indian Legislative Council when he asked, Has there recently been a case of collision between the police and some Indian coolies on a sugar plantation, Rose Hill [sic] (Canje Creek), Ber­ bice, in British Guiana? If so, has the attention of the Government been drawn to it? Do the Government propose to make an inquiry and lay the report of such inquiry on the table? Will the Government be pleased to state whether a judicial inquiry has been held in regard to this matter by the local authorities?62

In 1913, a report by Stipendiary Magistrate H.K.M. Sisnett questioned the manner in which the colonial authorities handled the indentured labourers on the Rose Hall plantations and the structure of the ‘holiday system’. This report was sent to the Gov­ ernment of India which was compelled to publish 100 copies, to be made available for the Indian public as a response to Banerji’s questions.63 The Rose Hall incident forced the Government of India to look towards the indentured labourers in the British West Indies and to justify the treatment of labourers in these colonies. Various individuals in British Guiana openly criticized the condi­ tion of Indians in that colony. Ruhomon for example, stated that, ‘… our people in this Colony and their children are so very little cared for by their employers or those who are in authority over them’.64 He called upon his Hindu-Guyanian friends, ‘To do all

112

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

that they could possible do, by tongue, by pen, on the platform and through the printing press, by exhortation and by practical, tangible help to promote and advance their interests in this Colony of British Guiana where our people are so little cared for and their interests so sadly neglected.’65 Although there was a tendency for leaders to emerge from the middle classes or the non-labouring/non-indenture class, on another level there were instances where indentured labourers themselves assumed leadership positions in the society. In Brit­ ish Guiana, Bechu was a prime example of one such individual. Bechu was a Bengali, belonging to the Koormi caste. As a young boy he was brought up in Calcutta by a Presbyterian missionary woman, under whose guidance he was educated. He had arrived in British Guiana at the age of 36 and was assigned to Plantation Enmore, East Coast Demerara. When he arrived in the colony he was assigned to the field. He worked there for three days but was then given work as an assistant driver, which he did for nine months. After this he was assigned domestic duties with the dep­ uty manager as he was constantly sick due to exposure to the rain. He was the only indentured labourer to produce a memorandum, as well as to testify before the West India Royal Commission.66 Bechu managed to acquire a remarkable amount of knowledge of the indentureship system and of the conditions of the indentured labourers on the estates. It was this knowledge that he brought to the fore under the scrutiny of the West India Royal Commission. What is of paramount importance in the case of Bechu is that he was able to provide information to the Commission – information that was contrary to the reports of the planters and magistrates and other officials in British Guiana. He pointed out that the opportu­ nities for the indentured labourers to complain to the immigration agent were limited. This was the case as the agent only visited the plantations once every month for approximately half an hour during which time the labourers were out at work in the fields. He also stated that the immigration agent did not inspect the bar­ racks or visited the hospitals. Bechu wrote letters of complaints and petitions on behalf of other labourers on Plantation Enmore. An example of this was the letters he wrote on behalf of indentured

‘Resistance from Within’

113

labourer Sukee whose application for a return passage to India had been refused three times.67 Bechu’s allegations to the West Indian Royal Commission may not have been sufficient to change the logistics of the indentureship system but they were enough to catch the interest of the Colonial Office. According to Clem Seecharan, the charges made by Bechu, …Effectively demolished the planters’ arguments of care and protection. In such a planter dominated society, any official, much less an indentured worker who championed the rights of immigrants or criticized the work­ ings of the indentureship system was bound to incur the odium of these powerful elite. Bechu’s vigorous and sustained criticism could lead to the demise of Indian indentureship, a situation which the planting interested were not prepared to tolerate.68

The fact that an indentured labourer was able to give evidence before an official delegation and identify the shortcomings of the indentureship system was sufficient to show that the labourers were not contented to simply sit back and accept their situation. It shows that they were attempting to use their already limited opportunities to agitate for some kind of improvements in their conditions. The case of Sukee is an interesting example of this. He had applied to return to India and was rejected three times and was now willing to try other means by asking Bechu to write a petition to the immigration agent general on his behalf.

The ‘Old Immigrants’ of Mauritius In Mauritius, there were protests against the indentureship system by the ‘old immigrants’ – those who had completed their inden­ tures and settled in the colony. They emphasized the general daily conditions of Indians in Mauritius and focused on penal stipu­ lations, impoverishment and offensive regulations. In a petition of the old immigrants of Mauritius which was presented to His Excellency the Honourable Sir Arthur Hamilton Gordon on 6 June 1871, one labourer noted, About the month of July 1868, I was living at the Nouvelle Decouverte. On a certain morning four policemen came, and, without a warrant,

114

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

entered my premises and asked for our papers; I was able to show the papers for myself and wife, but, through my house having been burnt down a short time previously, I could not show the police the acts of births of my children … but I explained this to the police … my children being respectively 9, 12 and 13 years of age … the police arrested my three children as vagabonds. They were taken to the Moka police sta­ tion, a distance of seven miles, and were locked up there till the following Friday.69

This petition that was presented to Governor Gordon was signed by 9,401 ‘old immigrants’. The labourers were unhappy with the restrictions placed on their movements and the need to carry a pass at all times. They were also dissatisfied with the difficulties in obtaining passes and the way in which the law was enforced by the police and others in authority. Generally, the campaign of the labourers in Mauritius focused on the severe labour laws in the colony, which dictated restrictions of movement and placed them at the mercy of the planters and colonial authorities. First, the issue of ‘double cut’ was emphasized. This stipulation, whereby two days’ wages could be deducted for each day of absence from work did not exist in the British West Indies or any other colo­ nies (later on, some planters replaced this with an extension of the period of contract, but this was never an official stipulation). Sec­ ond, the Vagrancy Law and the impoverished state of Indians on the island were emphasized. Labourers had to adhere to strict rules concerning passes and district police were rewarded for arrests of vagrants.70 ‘Hunting parties’ or ‘maroon hunts’ were organized to round up vagrants on the island. Third, the registration of Indian marriage was an area of concern taken up in the abolition cam­ paign. Indians were subjected to the French laws of marriage and succession so that marriages according to Indian religious cus­ toms were not legally recognized in the colony. Fourth, the high number of convictions of Indians and the biased judicial system was incorporated into the discourse. Many of the stipulations of the labour laws of Mauritius were not different from those in the other colonies. Also, the general conditions of the immigrants in Mauritius may not have been worse than in the other colonies. Cases of neglect of labourers,

‘Resistance from Within’

115

high convictions, poor living conditions, poverty and vagrancy were also common in other colonies, such as Fiji, Trinidad and British Guiana. What was different for Mauritius is that the labour laws were more rigidly implemented and the labour environment more controlled. The coercive element of indentureship was there­ fore more visible there then in some of the other colonies; it was not the case that coercion was lacking elsewhere. At the same time, problems and issues in other colonies, especially those in the Brit­ ish West Indies, were not brought to the attention of individuals and organizations agitating against the system. The indentureship system in Mauritius drew considerable attention from the Indian nationalists and the press in India.

Repatriated Indians Labourers: Natal and Fiji Similar to the British West Indian colonies, Mauritius and Fiji and other territories, the Indian indentureship system in Natal was facilitated by colonial need for labour. From 1860 until 1911, when the labour scheme was terminated (earlier than in some of the other colonies), approximately 152,000 Indians emigrated under the indentureship system where they worked on the sugar and wattle plantations and various farms and in the construction of railways as well as the coalmines. Of this number, about 58 per cent of the labourers remained as permanent settlers in the colony, when their contracts ended.71 The way the system operated in Natal was similar to other ter­ ritories with the exception that there was sometimes an even more rigid control placed over the labourers. Penal codes were rigidly implemented and the pass system was effectively enforced so that labourers could not go more than two miles from the estates where they were indentured. Working hours were extremely long and irregular as compared to some of the other colonies. Thus, an indentured labourer in Natal would often work up to eighteen hours a day and this was not only during crop time as in the Brit­ ish West Indies, but throughout the duration of the contract. Also, physical punishments were often common on estates. Further­ more, the government of Natal had adopted a very anti-indenture/

116

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Indian and a general anti-Asiatics policy so that cases of racism were rampant on the plantations of Natal. Labourers were often faced with inhumane living conditions on the plantations and their attempts to complain to the relevant authorities were often hindered by planters or distance from the Protector’s office, like in the other territories, they had to get a pass to leave the estate to lodge their complaints and these were often denied or their complaints were not addressed. Unlike the other labour-importing territories, after 1895, indentured labourers as well as all non-Asiatics, had to pay a tax of £3 and after 1905, they had to pay a poll tax of £1.72 These additional taxes represented the ethnic bias of a government that was not favourable towards non-whites, in this case, anyone who was ‘Asiatic’. Consequently, resistance by Indian indentured labourers was a common feature of Natal plantation life. The nature and form of protests were simi­ lar to those on West Indian plantations. In the same way that the indentured labourers in the West Indian colonies were attempting to alleviate their everyday situation and bring about immediate changes in their conditions, their counterparts in Natal were engaged in acts to change their daily conditions. Interestingly though, unlike the West Indian colonies, some of the Natal labourers who completed their contractual obligations and were repatriated to India, also protested against the labour scheme in India in an attempt to create some kind of changes in the structure and operation of the indentureship system in India. From November 1860, to March 1861, a total of 1,431.5 adult Indian labourers arrived in Natal. This group had been one of the earliest batches of indentured labourers who had emigrated from India to Natal in the 1860s. However, out of this group, 131 died, 43 were repatriated because of sickness, 96 left Natal for the dia­ mond fields; 739 postponed their return and continued as workers on the plantations, while 413 chose repatriation back to the moth­ erland.73 Thus, in 1871, approximately 413 Indian labourers who had completed their contracts, returned to India on board the Red Riding Hood and Umvoti. On arrival in India, these labourers made several reports to the Protector of Emigrants, which first emphasized the deficiencies

‘Resistance from Within’

117

in the recruitment process. Many of them did not sign individual contracts prior to embarkation and many complained that the terms of contractual obligations were not explained to them. Also, some of them had lived in various stages of destitution while in Natal. During the period of economic depression, some of them were left without work and were forced to resort to measly govern­ ment rations. After the crisis when they were placed on plantations, they were not reimbursed for the time that they were without any means of income. They told tales of flogging, insufficient food and clothing allowances, inadequate medical care and lack of oppor­ tunities whereby they could report their conditions and get their grievances redressed.74

Conclusion Novel Immigration Case De Verteuil vs. the Acting Governor and the Protector of Immigrants Motion for injunction against removal of Indentured Immigrants Do Colonial Governors fully represent the sovereign? Their Royal prerogatives limited by statute.75

In the case of the Indian indentured labourers, opportunities for resistance were already undermined to a large extent. The logistics of imperialism and colonialism did not leave much space for the oppressed people to challenge the system or to retaliate in many ways. The imperial powers established hegemonic control over the colonized and in so doing were able to assert their power. The situ­ ation therefore existed where domination and control went hand in hand and in order to ensure dominance it was imperative to have complete control over the subjected people. Under the Indian indentureship system, the labourers were subjected to one form of control or the other and the legal framework represented both a blatant and subtle effort to control the labour force and the entire system of indentured labour. At the same time, the colonial government always had the means and power to crush forms of resistance. The colonial state adopted a certain degree of antagonism towards the labourers and

118

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

once the colonial law was violated, the labourers could be brutally suppressed. The colonial powers never hesitated to use the ‘imple­ ments of domination’ such as the police, army and the legislature to reinforce their dominant position. This was particularly visible with the Hosay Riots of 1884 in Trinidad. In addition to this, one can see that instances of resistance by the indentured labourers themselves occurred on a rather sporadic basis and were localized efforts. The labourers themselves did not make many concerted efforts to emphasize their acts of resistance to any large extent and generally, these acts were not given much importance in the colo­ nial society. This idea is expressed by Scott who noted, ‘Everyday forms of resistance make no headlines. It is only rarely that the perpetrators of these petty acts seek to call attention to themselves. Their safety lies in their anonymity.’76 Even when resistance was most evident, the colonial authori­ ties found it necessary to de-emphasize these acts. This resulted in a lack of records where acts of resistance were concerned; the colonial government did not record these acts as a way of downplaying their importance and the bulk of the indentured labourers were illiterate and hence did not leave written records. According to David Hardiman, ‘British administrators, as well as colonial historians, frequently sought in the reports and writings to deny the rationality of such resistance’.77 The colonial authorities always felt compelled to portray the system as one that was working efficiently and one which gave full consideration to all parties in­ volved. Haraksingh noted that Data on resistance among sugar workers of all categories are not easy to come by. In the case of indentured labourers the local authorities, con­ scious of the watchful eye of the India Office and anxious to prevent any questioning of the system, consistently tried to convey the impression that all was sailing smoothly.78

Indeed, the colonial authorities did not see the need to pay any attention to resistance by the indentured labourers, as doing so would place importance on these acts. Scott expressed this idea quite coherently when he stated,

‘Resistance from Within’

119

It is also extremely rare that officials of the state wish to publicize the insubordination. To do this would be to admit that their policy is unpop­ ular, and, above all, to expose the tenuousness of their authority in the countryside – neither of which the sovereign state finds in its interest. The nature of the acts themselves and the self-interested muteness of the antagonists thus conspire to create a kind of complicitous silence that all but expunges everyday forms of resistance from the historical record.79

Despite all this, Indian indentured labourers did not meekly accept their position of subordination in the colonial society and were involved in activities that defied the colonial authorities at various levels. As a result, they managed to draw the attention of the Indian nationalists, the Government of India and the Colonial Office to the indentureship system as it existed in the colonies. While their acts of resistance were more often sporadic and unor­ ganized in the British West Indies, in territories such as Natal, Fiji and Mauritius it was often more organized. In the British West Indies it generally did not lead to any significant changes in the structure of the indentureship system but yet it added an ‘Indian voice’ to the entire labour scenario. Indians gave evidence before official delegations and contradicted statements given by officials involved in the indentureship system. The colonial authorities were indeed forced to recognize that the labourers were dissatisfied with their circumstances and although they may not have imple­ mented extensive strategies to improve the labourers’ conditions there was a general amelioration of conditions on the plantations and for free Indians in the society. Indeed, it was the first time that some space was allocated for the ‘Indian voice’ and the issues of the indentured labourers were considered in the legislation pro­ cess and taken before the Governor of the colony. As resistance by indentured labourers was not often collectively pre-planned and were localized efforts, the colonial planters and officials may not have viewed it as important to the extent that national policies were modified to any significant extent. However, in some cases these localized efforts were sufficient to convince planters that it was necessary to make changes in the everyday workings of the system. Generally, the adverse publicity that was

120

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

given to the scheme was sufficient to make the colonial authorities aware of the discontentment of the indentured labourers and to pay more attention to them. NOTES 1. Goolam Vahed, ‘Power and Resistance: Indentured Labour in Colonial Natal, 1860-1911’, in Man in India, 92(2): 303. 2. For an analysis of the Hosay Riots see Kelvin Singh, Bloodstained Tombs: The Muharram Massacre 1884, London: Macmillan Carib­ bean, 1988. 3. There is an extensive body of literature available on resistance by African slaves. For more on this topic refer to H. Beckles, AfroCaribbean Women and Resistance to Slavery in Barbados, London: Karnak House, 1988; idem, Black Rebellion in Barbados, Bridgetown: Carib Research and Publications, 1987, and Nigel Bolland, Struggles for Freedom: Essays on Slavery, Colonialism, and Culture in the Caribbean and Central America, Belize: Angelus Press, 1997. 4. See Bloch, Feudal Society, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1961. Bloch has dealt with the various forms of unfree labour which existed in Europe (vassalage, fiefdom, manorialism and so on) and has shown the extent to which the ‘lord’ of the land claimed superior real property rights over the cottage, the arable and the meadow of the village. 5. See A.R. Desai, Peasant Struggles in India, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1979; D.N. Dhanagare, Peasant Movements in India 1920-1950, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1983; David Hardiman, Peasant Resistance in India 1858-1914, Delhi: Oxford University Press; and Eric Stokes, The Peasant Armed: The Indian Revolt of 1857, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986. 6. Eric Hobsbawm, Bandits, Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1985, p. 30. 7. James C. Scott, Weapons of the Weak, London: Yale University Press, 1985, p. 242. 8. Scott, p. 315. 9. Stephen Duncombe, Cultural Resistance Reader, New York: Verso, 2002, p. 5. 10. This of course should not be interpreted as the migration of one ‘Indian culture’ as the indentured labourers transported a variety of religious, caste and cultural identities to the Caribbean colonies.

‘Resistance from Within’

11

12. 13. 14. 15.

16.

17. 18. 19.

20. 21.

22. 23. 24. 25.

121

I have dealt with these ideas in a paper entitled ‘Indians in Trinidad: Governmental Policies and the evolution of “Indian” culture’ presented at the 10th Annual Cultural Studies Workshop, Bhubaneswar, India, jointly organized by the Centre for Studies of the Social Sciences, Calcutta; Sephis and Ford Foundation, India, January 2004. Clem Shiwcharan (Seecharan), ‘The Development of the East Indian Community in British Guiana, 1920-1950,’ paper presented at the Staff/Graduate Seminar, Department of History, University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, 31 March 1982, p. 20. Roopnarine, p. 23. This included those who emigrated from India and those born in the colony to Indian parents. Percentages were calculated from statistics recorded in the Census of the Colony of Trinidad and Tobago, 1891. For more on the Hosay Riots of 1884 refer to Kelvin Singh, Blood­ stained Tombs: The Muharram Massacre 1884, London, Macmillan Caribbean, 1988. C. 4366, ‘Correspondence Respecting the Recent Coolie Disturbance in Trinidad at the Mohurrum Festival with the Report Thereon by Sir H.W. Norman, K.C.B., C.I.E.’, London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1885. The word ‘Creole’ is used here to refer to persons of African descent. C. 4366, Enclosure 1 in no. 3, 3. Ibid. Despatch from J. Scott Bushe, Esq., Administrator, Government of Trinidad to Her Majesty’s Secretary of State for the Colonies, Proceedings of the Government of Bengal in the Emigration Department, 1885. C. 4366, Enclosure 3 in no. 6, 9. C. 4366, Enclosure 1 in no. 6 ‘Petition of Certain Immigrants with Reference to the Immigrants’ Festivals Regulations’, 22 September 1885, p. 118. C. 4366 no. 9 ‘The Right Hon. the Earl of Derby, K.G., to Sir H.W. Norman, K.C.B., C.I.E’, p. 36. ‘Cooly Riot in Trinidad’, Proceedings of the Government of India, Home Department, Public Records, 1885. Ibid. Ibid.

122

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

26. Ved Prakash Vatuk, ‘Protests Songs of East Indians in British Guiana’, Journal of American Folklore, vol. 77, no. 305, July-September 1964, p. 224. 27. Kira Hall (ed.), Essays in Indian Folk Traditions: Collected Writings of Ved Prakash Vatuk, Meerut: Archana Publications, 2007, p. 413. 28. Ibid. 29. Ibid., p. 414. 30. Vatuk, p. 226. 31. Ibid., p. 227. 32. Hall, p. 418. 33. This was a derogatory word for the labourers. Its literal translation is ‘unbelievers’. The word is Muslim in origin 34. Hall, p. 417. 35. ‘Statement in the House of Commons by Secretary of State for the Colonies’, 15 April 1913. Proceedings of the Government of India in the Department of Commerce and Industry, Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing, 1913. 36. D.W.D. Comins, Note on Emigration from India to British Guiana, Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press, 1893, p. 50. 37. Council Paper no. 61 of 1917, M.P. no. 2575/1917, ‘Report of the Inspector-General of Constabulary for the year 1916’ by Geo. H. May, Colonel, Inspector-General of Constabulary. 38. Kenneth V. Parmasad, Kheesas and Kahanis: A Collection of Indian Folk Stories and Sayings in Trinidad, B.A. Diss., University of the West Indies, 1973. An English translation of this interview is: Many of them ran away, they are hiding you see. Going everywhere. The driver comes sometimes and makes trouble. If he tells the watchman to look at that man, he (the watchman) will look at you all the time. The man hides in the night. He will not go to work. 39. Table constructed based on figures given by D.W.D. Comins, Note on Emigration from India to Trinidad, Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press, 1893. 40. Statistics taken from CD. 5192, Report of the Committee on emigration from India to the Crown colonies and protectorates, Great Britain, June 1910, 3. Hereafter referred to as the Sanderson Report. 41. Council Paper no. 61 of 1917, M.P. no. 2575/1917, ‘Report of the Inspector-General of Constabulary for the year 1916’, by Geo. H. May, Colonel, Inspector-General of Constabulary. 42. Council Paper no. 102 of 1918, ‘Report of the Inspector-General of

‘Resistance from Within’

43.

44.

45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51.

52. 53.

54.

55. 56. 57.

58. 59.

123

Constabulary for the year 1917’, Port of Spain, Government Printing Office, 1918. Council Paper no. 88 of 1919, ‘Report of the Inspector-General of Constabulary for the year 1918’, Laid before the Legislative Council on 11 July 1919. CD. 5193, ‘Report of the Committee on emigration from India to the Crown Colonies and Protectorates: The Minutes of Evidence’, Great Britain: June 1910 (hereafter referred to as Sanderson Report, Evidence). Evidence given by the Honorable Cyrus Prudhomme David, p. 199. Shiwcharan (Seecharan), ‘The Development of the East Indian Community in British Guiana, 1920-1950’, p. 20. Gerad Tikasingh, ‘The Establishment of Indians in Trinidad, 1870­ 1900’, Ph.D. diss., University of the West Indies, 1973, p. 221. Ibid. Comins, Note on Emigration from India to Trinidad, Diary, p. 3. Ibid., p. 42. Ibid. Percentages tabulated based on figures given by D.W.D. Comins, Note on Emigration from India to British Guiana, Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press, 1893. Comins, p. 97. ‘Inquiry by a Stipendiary Magistrate, B.G., County of Berbice, Proceedings of the Government of India in the Department of Commerce and Industry, 1913, Calcutta: Superintendent Govern­ ment Printing, 1913. Table constructed based on figures given by D.W.D. Comins, Note on Emigration from India to British Guiana, and Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press, 1893, p. 95. Birbalsingh, Indo-Caribbean Resistance, p. 15. Ibid. This case is reported in an article by Basdeo Mangru, ‘Tadjah in British Guiana’, in Frank Birbalsingh (ed.), Indo-Caribbean Resist­ ance, Toronto: Tsar Publications, 1993, p. 15. Shepherd, Verene, Transients to Settlers: The Experience of Indians in Jamaica 1845 to 1950, Leeds: Peepal Tree Books, 1993. Table constructed based on statistics given in the Annual Report of the Protector of Immigrants, year ending 31 March 1914, Proceedings of the Government of India in the Department of Commerce and Industry, Calcutta, Superintendent Government Printing, 1915.

124

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

60. Thomas, Arnold, ‘The History of East Indians in St. Vincent: From Indenture to Secondary Migration’. 61. ‘Statement in the House of Commons by the Secretary of State for the Colonies, 15 April, 1913’, Proceedings of the Government of India in the Department of Commerce and Industry, 1913, Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing, 1913. 62. ‘Questions proposed to be asked by the Hon’ble Mr. Surendra Nath Banerji in the Legislative Council’, no. 42 of 1913, Proceedings of the Government of India in the Department of Commerce and Industry, 1913, Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing, 1913. 63. ‘Telegram P. dated the 18th August 1913 from the Secretary of State for India, London to the Viceroy, Simla’, Proceedings of the Government of India in the Department of Commerce and Industry, 1913, Calcutta: Superintendent Government Printing, 1913. 64. Clem Seecharan, Joseph Ruhomon’s India: The Progress of Her People at Home and Abroad, and How Those in British Guiana May Improve Themselves, Kingston: University of the West Indies Press, 2001, p. 67. 65. Seecharan, Joseph Ruhomon’s India, p. 70. 66. See Clem Seecharan, Bechu: ‘Bound Coolie’ Radical in British Guiana 1894-1901, Kingston: University of the West Indies Press, 1999. 67. C. 8657, ‘Report of the West Indian Royal Commission, West India Royal Commission, 1897’, British Parliamentary Papers, Irish University Press Series, Shannon Island: Irish University Press, 1971. 68. Seecharan, Bechu, p. 11. 69. C. 1115. ‘The Petition of the Old Immigrants of Mauritius’, presented to His Excellency the Honourable Sir Arthur Hamilton Gordon, 6 June 1871, Report of the Royal Commissioners appointed to enquire into the treatment of immigrants in Mauritius, London: William Clowes and Sons, 1875, p. 2. The petition contained 102 signatures, and sixteen detail cases of immigrants who suffered under the Labour Laws and was drafted by Adolphe de Plevitz. 70. C. 1115. ‘Report of the Royal Commissioners appointed to enquire into the treatment of immigrants in Mauritius’, London, William Clowes and Sons, 1875. 71. Bhana, 1991, p. 20. 72. Ibid., p. 119. 73. Robert A. Huttenback, Gandhi in South Africa: British Imperialism and the Indian Question, 1860-1914, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1971), p. 8.

‘Resistance from Within’ 74. 75. 76. 77.

125

For more on this topic refer to ibid., p. 9. Port of Spain Gazette, 31 March 1916. Scott, p. 36. David Hardiman, Peasant Resistance in India, 1858-1914, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1993, p. 1. 78. Haraksingh, p. 26. 79. Scott, p. 36.

CHAPTER 4

Fighting the System Middle-class Indian Protests in

Labour-importing Territories

There was the emergence and development of an Indian middle class in the colonies which imported Indian indentured labour­ ers during the years of indentureship. In the British West Indian colonies this middle class comprised Indians who were no longer employed as agricultural labourers but were working in various professional fields. It was characterized by an upward movement either away from field labour or agriculture labour on the whole. It was made up of those Indians who had completed their contracts and moved away from agriculture into small businesses such as shop-keeping, those who managed to get jobs in the government offices as clerks, and those who acquired fortunes in whatever ways and were no longer tied to contracts as well as those who were able to purchase land and became both proprietors and landlords. This middle class increased numerically with the education of the children of indentured labourers who, upon completion of varying levels of education were able to get government jobs as clerks, trainee teachers, etc. In Fiji and Mauritius and the British West Indian colonies they were a minority, as the bulk of the Indian population there belonged to the lower classes of agricultural workers. In territories such as Natal, Fiji and Mauritius, there were also Indians who had migrated as professionals and non-labourers who also belonged to the middle class. In the West Indies however, the majority of the labourers who immigrated to the colonies were agricultural labourers engaged in contract labour. In the ‘Mother Country,’ India, the middle class comprised

Fighting the System

127

English-educated individuals who were employed in the profes­ sions. The Indian middle class in the territories – the British West Indies, Fiji, Mauritius and Natal, were certainly not homogeneous groups and as such, the middle-class experience differed accord­ ing to the territory and the composition of the groups, as well as the ways in which they identified themselves and their relation­ ships with the ‘Mother Country.’ The Indian middle classes in the labour-importing colonies did not always condone the indentureship system. On the con­ trary, some Indians in various territories were actively involved in open criticisms against the system. They protested at various levels against the inhumane conditions of the labourers and their protests were instrumental in drawing the attention of the British imperial government to the daily conditions of indentured labour­ ers and free Indians and influential in the colonial policy-making process. In the British West Indies, the Indian middle classes were in an early stage of development and the protests against Indian immigration were limited in demands, volume and intensity. The lack of cohesion as well as the non-existence of a strong sense of an Indian ethnic identity in the British West Indies prohibited the establishment of a platform whereby indentureship as one part of an imperialist framework could be completely eroded. How­ ever, the Indian middle class in South Africa, Fiji and Mauritius were more vocal in their protests against indentured labour and the iniquitous treatment of Indians in those territories. In South Africa, issues of racial discrimination against Indians were the basis of the abolition discourse while the Indian middle class in Fiji and Mauritius emphasized the poor conditions of the labour­ ers. In these territories, ex-indentured labourers and free Indian immigrants played a more crucial role in drawing the attention of the Government of India and the British imperial government to the problems of Indians residing in those colonies.

Protests in South Africa Ex-indentured labourers and free Indian immigrants played a more crucial role in Natal1 and Mauritius, in drawing the attention of the Government of India and the British Imperial Government

128

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

to the problems of Indians residing in those colonies. Natal was a relatively late importer of Indian indentured labourers, having received its first shipment on 15 November 1860; thirty-four years after the first set of Indian labourers arrived in Mauritius, 22 years after the indentureship system was introduced in British Guiana and 15 years after it was introduced in Trinidad. It was also one of the first areas where indentured labour was prohibited. There were two distinct phases in the importation of bonded labourers in Natal. The first phase was from 1860 to 1866. During this period, the immigration of indentured labourers was neither regular nor substantial. In fact, indentured labourers arrived in Natal only in the years 1861 and 1864-5: approximately 2,475 labourers arrived in Natal in 1861 while about 1,360 immigrated in 1864 and 2,400 landed in 1865. During the period, 1866 to 1874, Indian immigration was temporarily stopped to Natal as the colony experienced an economic depression. Immigration was resumed in 1874 with extra fervour and from 1874 to 1875 there was an average of one ship per month arriving in Natal, with approximately 5,975 labourers. During the second phase, there was an almost continuous influx of labourers until 1911 and approximately 77,000 Indians immigrated as indentured labourers to Natal.2 In Natal, the composition of the Indian middle class was differ­ ent from that of the Indian middle class in Trinidad and British Guiana, where the group was composed primarily of ex-inden­ tured labourers or children of indentured labourers who were born in the colony. In Natal, from the late 1870s, there was the influx of free Indians, mostly traders from Gujarat, who estab­ lished shops in the towns of Natal as well as in the Transvaal.3 Like Trinidad, the ex-indentured labourers in Natal opted to remain as permanent settlers when they had completed their contracts. In Natal, the majority did not remain as labourers on the plantations. According to one author, There was a tendency, throughout the indenture period, for a growing number of indentured workers to be employed outside the sugar fields: growing other tropical crops; working in agriculture in the inland parts

Fighting the System

129

of the colony where agriculture was based on grains and pastoral activity; in the coal mines on the Natal Government Railway system … and as service and domestic workers.4

The number of free Indians in Natal who were not employed on the plantations increased steadily. In 1896, it was estimated that the population of Natal was approximately 501,000; 80 per cent were native Kaffirs, 10 per cent Europeans, and 10 per cent Indians. The total number of Indians in Natal was averaged at 51,000; 59 per cent of this number were free Indians who had completed their indentures and had remained in Natal as household servants, petty farmers, vegetable hawkers, petty storekeepers and so on. Thirtyone per cent of the Indian population was indentured labourers still under contract and the remaining 10 per cent comprised Indians who had immigrated to Natal on their own means and were mostly traders.5 In 1909, only 27 per cent of ex-indentured labourers were working on the plantations, a mere 7,006 out of an ex-indentured population of 25,569 labourers.6 This was quite distinct from the Trinidad situation where in 1891 for example, 78 per cent of the total adult Indian population in Trinidad was employed in agriculture, 2 per cent as domestic workers, 13.6 per cent could be found in industrial activities and 1.6 per cent was engaged in commercial activities.7 While the ex-indentured labourers were encouraged to settle in some of the British West Indian colonies via offers of cash incen­ tives or a land grant, and were seen as important to the agriculture economy, in Natal the colonial authorities saw the Indians as a problem as the numbers who remained in agriculture diminished steadily over the years. In their capacity as indentured labourers, the Indians did not pose a threat to the Europeans in Natal. Like the other colonies, Indian immigration was tolerated as an eco­ nomic necessity, the labourers were supposed to provide labour on the plantations for a short period and then return to their ‘Mother Country’, upon which a new batch of labourers would proceed to Natal. Thus, once they were allowed to work under contract, with laws implicitly imposed to curtail the freedom of movement and all other aspects of their lives, they were more or less left up to

130

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

their own (rather highly regulated) means. Once they attempted to establish themselves economically outside of the plantation econ­ omy, an ‘Indian problem’ developed in the colony and the Indians became an economic and political threat to the white colonial elite in Natal. Measures were implemented to control the Indians and the political instruments in the colony were used to ensure the con­ tinued subjugation of this group of colonized people. In 1894 Act no. 25 (the Franchise Law Amendment Bill of 1894) was passed, disqualifying persons of Asiatic origin from having their names included in the voters’ list. It exempted those whose names were already on the voters’ list but was very instrumental in preventing the number of Indian voters from expanding. The 1895 Immigra­ tion Law Amendment Bill provided for an indefinite period of indenture or the compulsory return of the immigrant to India. If the immigrant failed to re-indenture or return to India, s/he was liable to pay an annual license of £3 annually. Ordinance no. 15 of 1869, restricted ‘coloured persons’ from being outside the home after 9 o’clock in the night unless in possession of a pass from their respective employer. In the Colony of the Cape of Good Hope, the parliament passed a bill in 1894 which gave authority to the East London Municipality to frame by-laws prohibiting Indians from walking on the footpaths and forcing them to reside in spe­ cific locations.8 It was also difficult for Indians to obtain trading licenses there. In the Transvaal, a by-law no. 3 of 1885 was passed which stated that no Indians or other coloured persons could vote or own fixed properties and anyone who settled as a trader was to be registered within eight days of arrival and pay a registration fee of £25. If anyone disregarded the law the individual could be fined from £30 to 100 or face one to six months imprisonment. The Transvaal government also had the right to specify residential locations for Indians and coloureds.9 The laws regarding passes were also implemented in British West Indies and labourers had to produce a pass once outside of the plantations. In fact, some educated middle-class Indians in British West Indian colonies such as Trinidad and British Guiana protested against this. In Natal, however, the protests against the

Fighting the System

131

pass laws was just one small part of the opposition to the dis­ crimination faced by Indians. Indians in Natal resented the use of the term ‘coolie’ and the stigma associated with its use. In South Africa, the Indians were also called ‘Asiatics’ or ‘coloureds’, terms used to situate them in a society that was politically dominated by Europeans. The issues that developed in South Africa thus went beyond that of restriction of movement.10 The Indians in Natal focused on such racial discrimination and attacked the structure of British imperialism. Their main conten­ tion was that Indians were British subjects regardless of where they resided in the British Empire. By 1893, the free Indians in Natal were expressing the opinion that they were subjects of the British Empire and as such, they deserved the same rights and privileges as British citizens anywhere else within the Empire. They frequently invoked parts of the Queen’s Proclamation of 1858 which stated, We hold ourselves bound to the natives of our Indian territories by the same obligations of duty which bind us to all our other subjects, and these obligations … we shall faithfully and conscientiously fulfill. It is our further will that, so far as may be, our subjects, of whatever race or creed, be freely and impartially admitted to offices in our service, the duties of which they may be qualified by their education, ability, and integrity, duly to discharge.11

Numerous references were made to parts of Article XIV of the Convention of London of 1884 to justify their claims and to solidify their positions as British subjects in one part of the British Empire. All persons, other than natives, conforming themselves to the laws of the South African Republic (a) will have full liberty, with their families, to enter, travel, or reside in any part of the South African Republic; (b) they will be entitled to hire or possess houses, manufactories, warehouses, shops and premises; (c) they may carry on their commerce either in per­ son or by agents whom they may think fit to employ; (d) they will not be subject, in respect of their persons or properties, or in respect of their commerce or industry, to any taxes, whether general or local, other than those which are or may be imposed upon citizens of the said Republic.12

The Indians asserted that as British citizens they were entitled to

132

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

the same rights and benefits as other British citizens, which trans­ lated into the right to settle anywhere, independent movement, and the opportunity to establish trading enterprises. Once the Indians in South Africa questioned the ideology of British imperialism, they received the attention of the British Imperial Government. In the British West Indies, some Indians were questioning the status of ‘coolies’ in the society but the framework of British imperial policy did not feature in their discourse. The protests of Indians in South Africa surpassed that of the British West Indies in terms of volume, intensity and organization and had a greater impact on the abolition of the system of inden­ tured labour. It was a protest at the level of ‘high politics’, with numerous delegations, memorials and petitions to the colonial rul­ ers in South Africa, to the Government of India and to the British Imperial Government. From 1894 to 1910, the colonial authorities were inundated by a barrage of letters, petitions, memorials and deputations to prominent government officials. For example, on 3 July 1894 a deputation was sent to the Governor of Natal, Sir Walter Francis Hely-Hutchinson.13 In the same year, a petition was presented to the President and member of the Legislative Council, the Hon. Henry Campbell. He was one of the advocates and chief agent for British Indian merchants in the Transvaal.14 Evidently, the consciousness of an Indian identity was more deeply established in South Africa than in the British West Indies. The distance from India to the British West Indies and the mini­ mum interaction that occurred between the two colonies was one reason for this. The Indians in the British West Indies had close psychological and cultural ties with India but the sense of ethnic Indian identity that was developing in India was not transferred to the British West Indies at this time. The free Indian immigrants in South Africa however, identified with India and resided in South Africa only temporarily. Public meetings were used to sensitize the Indians in South Africa and to gain their support for the Indian agitation that developed there. The Governor of Natal noted in 1903 that, ‘A large meeting of British Indians, held at Johannesburg … denounced the action of the Government with considerable

Fighting the System

133

acerbity, and claimed for themselves absolutely equality of treat­ ment with all other British subjects.’15 In general, any legislation which was perceived as morally unjust and economically and politically discriminatory against Indians in Natal, was instantly greeted by various manifestations of dissatisfaction. Free Indians adopted the attitude that if the gov­ ernment could not decide on their status and position then they (the Indians) will determine this and get the colonial governments in Natal and the Transvaal to abide by their decision. One of the reasons why the Government of India and the British Imperial Government paid attention to the agitation by Indians in South Africa was the level of organization and mass mobilization that had come about by 1913. First, the bulk of the leadership came from the upper stratum of the Indian population and was actu­ ally dominated by Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi and Gandhian politics, characterized by rather moralist or humanist approaches to the problems of Indians and rather intellectually-oriented appeals and attempts at legislative changes. This does not mean that the lower classes were not actively involved in the protests; the indentured labourers on the Natal sugar plantations were engaged in acts of desertion and strikes were common. The organizations formed to articulate the grievances of the Indians in South Africa were much more formidable than in other colonies than in the British West Indies. In 1893, the Natal Indian Congress (hereafter referred to as the Natal Congress) was established, comprising a substantial proportion of the influential Indians in Natal.16 The Natal Congress was more interested in the welfare of the free Indian population and only one of its objectives pertained to the indentured labourers specifically; to inquire into the conditions of the indentured Indians and to take proper steps to alleviate their sufferings. The other objectives referred to Indians in the colony in general – (1) To promote concord and harmony among the Indians and the Europeans residing in the Colony; (2) to inform the people in India by writing to the newspapers, publishing pamphlets, and delivering lectures; (3) to induce Hindustanis – particularly Colonial-born Indians – to study Indian history and

134

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

literature relating to India; (4) to inquire into the condition of the Indians and to take proper steps to remove their hardships; (5) to help the poor and helpless in every reasonable way; (6) to do such work as would tend to improve the moral, social and political conditions of the Indians.17 The Natal Congress became the main advocate of the Indian case in South Africa but other organizations such as the South African Indian Committee also played a role in the protests (this organization had demanded the repeal of the tax of £3 in 1911).18 The pinnacle of organized resistance in Natal occurred in 1913 with the satyagraha campaign that resulted in the Smuts-Gandhi agreement of 1914. This open protest, supported by approximately 5,000 Indians was a deciding factor in drawing the attention of the British Imperial Government to Indians residing in the various colonies. It demonstrated the extent to which a colonized group could become a threat to the foundation of British rule in any one colony. A threat to British imperialism of this intensity was not seen in any other colony importing indentured labour.

Protests in Mauritius and Fiji The issues that dominated the agitation movement in Fiji and Mau­ ritius pertained more to the inhuman conditions of the Indians in these colonies rather than discrimination on the basis of race as was seen in South Africa. The campaign in Mauritius focused on the severe labour laws in the colony, which dictated restrictions of movement and placed them at the mercy of the planters and colonial authorities. First, the issue of ‘double cut’ was emphasized. This stipulation, whereby two days’ wages could be deducted for each day of absence from work did not exist in Trinidad or any other colonies. In the British West Indies, some planters replaced this with an extension of the period of contract, but this was never an official stipulation. Second, the Vagrancy Law and the impov­ erished state of Indians on the island were emphasized. Labourers had to adhere to strict rules concerning passes and district police were rewarded for arrests of vagrants.19 ‘Hunting parties’ or ‘maroon hunts’ were organized to round up vagrants on the island.

Fighting the System

135

Third, the registration of Indian marriage was an area of concern taken up in the abolition campaign. Indians were subjected to the French laws of marriage and succession so that marriages accord­ ing to Indian religious customs were not legally recognized in the colony. Fourth, the high number of convictions of Indians and the biased judicial system was incorporated into the discourse. Many of the stipulations of the labour laws of Mauritius were not different from those in the other colonies. Also, the general condition of the immigrants in Mauritius may not have been worse than in the other colonies. Cases of neglect of labourers, high conviction rate, poor living conditions, poverty and vagrancy were also common in other colonies such as Fiji, Trinidad and British Guiana. What was different for Mauritius is that the labour laws were more rigidly implemented and the labour environment was more controlled. The coercive element of indentureship was therefore more visible there than in the other colonies; it was not the case that coercion was lacking elsewhere. At the same time, problems and issues in other colonies, especially those in the Brit­ ish West Indies, were not brought to the attention of individuals and organizations agitating against the system. Probably due to geographic proximity which influenced communication between Mauritius and India, the indentureship system in Mauritius drew considerable attention from the Indian nationalists and the press in India. Additionally, the agitators in India were looking for ammunition against the British Imperial Government in the fight to end the labour scheme, and the inhuman conditions and harsh treatment of labourers in Mauritius provided this ammunition. The issues which were emphasized in Mauritius, were taken up in Fiji and the Fiji agitators also focused on issues of poverty, high number of convictions, murders and recruitment abuses. The difference with the Fiji protests is that the condition of female indentured labourers and issues of morality were included in the abolition campaign. Whereas in the South African context an attack on racial discrimination was used to undermine British imperialism, in the case of Fiji, the British Imperial Government was made to appear unconcerned for the welfare of vulnerable subjects. For example, the issue was no longer to do with poor

136

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

conditions, instead the focus was on the impact of poor condi­ tions of the lives of Indian women. Overcrowding and unsanitary conditions of the ‘coolie lines’ placed Indian women in a situation where it was impossible for them to develop ‘pure homes’ and maintain their chastity.20 The recruiters in India were employing coercive measures to obtain female labourers. The disproportion in the male to female sex ratio was then intensified because of the overcrowding in the ‘coolie lines’. Female indentured labourers in Fiji were projected as victims of an imperialist system of labour; not sufficiently protected against sexual exploitation by European males in the society. The campaign was aided immensely when the case of Kunti was popularized in Fiji and then in India.21 Kunti was used as an exam­ ple of all female indentured labourers who were willing to resist sexual exploitation, even if it meant by death, rather than submit to the wishes of European planters. Sexual assault and exploitation of Indian women by Indian men was downplayed and the focus was on European planters and overseers. While the colonial authorities tended to project the Indian women as manipulative and of poor character (often claiming that they were prostitutes) individuals agitating against the system portrayed them as extremely chaste (incarnations of the goddesses Sita and Savitri) who were placed in a situation where they were forced to be immoral, but were willing to protect their honour and virtue.22 Indian men were not blamed for their part in sexual exploitation and domestic abuse. Even when there were cases of wife murders, it was blamed on the recruiting practices and disproportionate male to female ratio. Some extreme nationalist views noted that Indian men preferred to kill the women to save their chastity rather than let them become prostitutes.

The British West Indies The protests in the British West Indies centred more on the colonies with the larger numbers of indentured labourers – Trini­ dad and British Guiana. In both instances, the criticisms against indentureship or Indian emigration in general was not significant

Fighting the System

137

enough to lead to the complete termination of indentured labour but were instrumental in deriving certain concessions for the Indian middle classes and indirectly for the labourers. In Trinidad, the emerging Indian middle class comprised a cou­ ple of organizations and a few individuals who protested against the status of Indians in Trinidad. It mostly raised issues regard­ ing the middle-class Indians. Sometimes issues pertaining to the indentureship system were emphasized; otherwise, the indentured labourers were included in the middle-class discourse when refer­ ences were made to the general situation of Indians in the colony. The protests of this group represented a change in the nature of the resistance by the last two decades of the nineteenth century – from that of localized, sporadic acts by Indian labourers to a more orga­ nized form of national protests by educated and/or free Indians. First, there was the formation of an ‘Indian solidarity’ beyond the plantation level and a conscious move to organize Indians in the colonies. This was mainly the effort of the East Indian National Association (EINA) which was established in 1897 in south Trini­ dad. The organization was formed by James Mungal and David Mahabir and consisted of other free Indians such as Timothy Sirju, Charles Soodeen, Adool Aziz, Thomas Walter, Hassanali, Kismat­ ali, George Adhar, Ajodhia Maharaj, Abdul Ghany, Ramsawak Pundit, Ramrattan Maharaj, Bharatsingh, Karim, Budhusingh and Bahadurali.23 The EINA comprised mainly Presbyterian literate Indians. It attempted to promote the general interests of Indians in Trinidad. The protests of the organization focused on specific clauses of the Indian Immigration Ordinance that were seen as repressive and affected the free Indian population’s ‘freedom and privileges as British subjects.’24 It expressed dissatisfaction with, [T]he re-enactment of the vagrancy Clause 17 of 9 of 1875 – now section 147 of the New Ordinance – which seriously interfered with the liberty of the East Indians and their descendants, for under this ordinance not only the indentured immigrants but the unindentured as well should they be found on a public highway can be easily arrested and put to a great deal of trouble and annoyance.25

The EINA was particularly unhappy with this clause as it

138

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

restricted their movements and treated then as second-class sub­ jects. It noted that, The great hardships is that an unindentured immigrant who may be walking along a public highway, on perfectly legitimate business, but who happens not to be armed at the time with a certificate of exemption from labour, is arrested by a policeman and kept locked up in a felon’s cell, at times for some days before he can conveniently be taken to a Magis­ trate.…26

It felt that a scenario such as the one above showed disrespect for the free Indians in the colony and was a ‘personal annoyance to which a freeborn British subject is subjected to’.27 According to one newspaper article, these clauses hurt the most and free Indians were determined that they should be modified. The free Indians were particularly careful about their status in the society and did not think that the ‘term immigrant should be applied to them in perpetuity but only for ten years’.28 Upon completion of their indenture and acquisition of residence status, they were simply subjects. As far as they were concerned, they were free British sub­ jects and did not want to be likened to slaves or slavery. 29 The EINA protested against certain clauses that dealt with the indentured labourers specifically. It felt that the Immigration ordinance was unnecessarily authoritarian and expressed dissat­ isfaction with the definition of a deserter (Section 151) and the penalty imposed for desertion.30 It articulated its grievances though petitions and deputations to the Governor. For example, on Friday 1 October 1897, a delegation visited Sir Hubert E.H. Jerningham, the Governor of Trinidad. The representatives submitted a petition asking for the nullification of certain clauses of the Immigration Ordinance (no. 12 of 1897).31 The association held public meetings in south Trinidad to talk about its objections to the clauses of the Immigration Ordinance and in 1897, it made its first request for direct representation in the Legislative Council.32 The association’s objections were discussed in the Legislative Council. This was the first time that issues raised by the Indian middle-class were discussed in the Council. The Legislative Coun­ cil proposed to consider these complaints although ultimately

Fighting the System

139

EINA’s objectives were not realized. This showed that the voices of the Indian population under the instigation of a few literate middle class Indians were being heard, though still muffled. The EINA also managed to gather the Indian population together to a certain extent; its meetings were attended by illiterate Indians despite the fact that most of its activities were geared towards the benefit of the Indian middle class.33 There was also the emergence of the East Indian National Congress (EINC) in 1910 in central Trinidad, again under the insti­ gation of the Trinidad Indian middle class. This association did not play an active role as that of the EINA. The general outcome of the formation of organizations such as these was that they provided a basic framework for the establishment of an ethnic identity and Indian solidarity. They were aided by the press and various Indian leaders. The first Indian-only newspaper, the Indian Koh-i-noor Gazette came into existence in October 1898 and was published daily until April 1899. In the first edition, the editor stated that it was fifty-three years since the arrival of the Fatel razack and the first batch of indentured labourers to the colony. He noted that, A fair proportion of these colonists by virtue of their temperate and fru­ gal habits, combined with their strict attention to business, have amassed competencies and realizing the vast progressive influence of the Press, are now resolved to lay that foundation stone of civilization which will bring them into touch with the general community and the universal interest thereof. With this object, in view we launch the ‘KOH-I-NOOR’ hoping that as its name implies, ‘Mountain of Light’ it may light up the ways of those who are still struggling in the darkness of ignorance, and shed rays of instruction and amusement on one and all.34

This newspaper published articles on the general occurrences in the colony and did not focus solely on affairs affecting the Indian population. However, it made a special attempt to reach the Indian population by publishing a section in Hindi. It encouraged Indians to be faithful citizens of the Empire. One article stated, … the time has come for our Indian population, Hindu and Mussulman to assert and prove their claims to be good citizens, and faithful subjects,

140

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

proud to be under the‘Raj’, of the beloved Queen and Empress. Trinidad is but a small gem in the British Crown, but under a wise administration backed up by a progressive and unprejudiced press, she can play her own part in the grand Drama.35

At the same time, it attempted to keep the Indian population aware of situations and issues in India and ran a daily column called ‘General Intelligence from India’. It published articles from Indian newspapers such as the Friend of India.36 Some articles referred specifically to Indian immigration. For example, it pub­ lished extracts of the annual report on emigration from Calcutta.37 One Christian, Presbyterian-educated Indian wrote to the edi­ tor of the San-Fernando Gazette under the pseudonym of ‘A Son of India’. He started with an address to the Governor in which he sug­ gested that Indians should be encouraged to settle in the colony rather than be repatriated. He noted that Indians were ‘differently treated by those in authority’ and that ‘sixty thousand people of one nationality do not constitute an unimportant element in a colony of a population of one hundred and eighty thousands souls’.38 ‘A Son of India’ called for non-denominational education for Indians and lauded the Governor for taking an interest in the situation of the Indians. The writer stated that, In order to obtain the permanent residence of the Indians in this Island there must be laws enacted by the Government to meet their various wants. Schools should be established for the compulsory education of their children and privileges allowed to them as are now given to those of other nationalities. It is not too much to ask, from the Government these privileges, for we consider ourselves part and parcel of the great British Empire and not aliens….39

He called for the registration of Indian marriages and applauded the government for attempting to listen to the recommendations of the Indians in the colony when drafting an Indian Marriage Ordinance.40 Other individuals such as George Fitzpatrick and Francis Eve­ lyn Mohammed Hosein helped in highlighting certain aspects of the indentureship system and gave evidence before the Sanderson

Fighting the System

141

Committee in 1909.41 Hosein was one of Trinidad’s first lawyers of Indian descent; he was born in Trinidad and his parents were indentured labourers in Arouca. He was the first Indo-Trinidadian to win an island scholarship and he attended Oxford Univer­ sity and Lincoln’s Inn in England. He was a barrister, politician and mayor.42 He noted that generally, the indentured labourers appeared contented but they did not always have the opportunity to complain and their complaints were not always heard. Also, the number of convictions of indentured labourers in the colony had increased.43 Fitzpatrick was also born in Trinidad and his father was an indentured labourer. He was appointed as the ‘Indian delegate’ to give evidence before the Sanderson Committee. He informed the committee that the unindentured Indians in Trinidad were fairly contented but the same could not be stated for the inden­ tured labourers. He disagreed with the rather imperialist view postulated by Reverend John Morton and criticized the infrequent visits of the magistrates as well as the inability of the immigrants to complain about their grievances.44 While the Indian middle class in Trinidad voiced its opinion on certain topics affecting Indians in the colony and their protests got the attention of the Trinidad colonial government to the situation of Indians in the colony, it did not result in any significant changes to the status of Indians, free or indentured, in Trinidad. In British Guiana, the emergence of various individuals who assumed leadership positions in the colonies assisted in changing the nature of resistance from a less localized one to a more expan­ sive type of agitation. One such leader was Joseph Ruhomon who distinguished himself as one of the first Indo-Guyanese to openly call upon Indians to improve themselves. Ruhomon was born on 2 August 1873 at Plantation Albion, on the Corentyne Coast, in the county of Berbice. His father Ruhomon had been taken at the age of eleven years to British Guiana as an indentured labourer. He was an educated Indian who assumed a leadership role in the colony.45 Ruhomon was most known for a pamphlet entitled India: The Progress of Her People at Home and Abroad and How Those in Brit­ ish Guiana may Improve Themselves published in 1894, arising out

142

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

of a public lecture earlier that year. He called on the ‘intelligent and cultured’ Indians to help other Indians. He openly criticized the colonial authorities and noted ‘… our people in this Colony and their children are so very little cared for by their employers or those who are in authority over them.’46 He also called upon his ‘Hindo-Guyanian friends to do all that they could possible do, by tongue, by pen, on the platform and through the printing press, by exhortation and by practical, tangible help to promote and advance their interests in this Colony of British Guiana where our people are so little cared for and their interests so sadly neglected.’47 Ruho­ mon was speaking about Indians in general and while he included the immigrants by extension, he was not specifically advocating the cause of the indentured labourers. He believed that the Indians in general could only escape the depressed situation that they were in if they were devoted to their intellectual, moral and social well­ being. Ruhomon was an example of one of the literate, Christian, non-indentured individuals who was agitating for improvement in the conditions of the Indians in general and not specifically the indentured labourers.

Outcomes, Linkages and Comparisons The anti-indenture voice of the press could be heard more dis­ tinctly in South Africa, Mauritius and Fiji than in the British West Indies. As mentioned previously the Indian middle classes in Trinidad attempted to articulate their grievances in the Creoledominated, anti-Indian Trinidad press and were rather limited in their attempts. However, the Indian leaders in other colonies articulated their grievances through newspapers and journals that were created especially for this purpose. Gandhi established the Indian Opinion in 1903 while in South Africa and continued its publication when he returned to India in 1914.48 Manilal Maganlal Doctor started the Hindustani that was published in both English and Hindi. In 1917, publication of the Indian Settler began in Fiji with Manilal as editor of the English section.49 Manilal was Guja­ rati, born in Baroda in 1881. He was a lawyer by profession. He was a member of Gokhale’s Servants of India Society in India and

Fighting the System

143

one of Gandhi’s associate. He started the Hindustani newspaper in Mauritius, one of the colony’s first political journals. There was a ‘quadrangular trade’ of ideas, information, griev­ ances and protests which existed amongst India, Fiji, South Africa and Mauritius, which impacted immensely on the policies of the Government of India and the British imperial government. The level of interaction between these territories and the articulation of grievances posed a major threat to British imperialism. The movement of leaders from one colony to another and the pub­ lication of issues amongst colonies combined to ensure that the Government of India was well informed of the grievances of Indi­ ans abroad. The British West Indian colonies were not included in this interaction and only sporadic references were made about the indentured labourers in the West Indies. In fact, linkages between Trinidad and India only opened up after the 1920s with a visit to the colony by Reverend Charles Freer Andrews. This was followed by visits from Indian nationalists such as Pundit Jaimini Mehta in the 1930s. In 1901, Gandhi visited Mauritius. He had heard of the poor conditions of the Indians there from a Mauritian India who had settled in Natal, Tambu Naidoo. Gandhi’s visit resulted in a num­ ber of public meetings, visits around the island and meetings with colonial officials such as the Governor, Sir Charles Bruce.50 On 1 December 1901, he submitted a full report on the Indians in Mauritius to the Indian National Congress, thereby bringing the attention of the Indian nationalists to the situation of Indians in Mauritius. In 1907, Manilal arrived in Mauritius, on the request of Gandhi. Manilal’s arrival in the colony served as a catalyst in the agitation on behalf of Indians in the colony. He was instrumental in publicizing the poor living conditions of the indentured labour­ ers; his influence contributed to the establishment of a Royal Commission of enquiry in 1909 (he also gave evidence before this Commission); he held meetings all over the island and in remote villages and he used the Hindustani to discuss the problems of the Indians and to draw attention to the indentured labourers’ daily living conditions. In 1912 Manilal went to Fiji.51 In that same year, Gokhale visited South Africa and addressed Indians in various

144

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

areas of Natal and the Transvaal. Reverend Andrews, W. Pearson and H. Polak moved between South Africa, Fiji and India from 1914 to 1917.52 This movement amongst territories encouraged spates of agitation and protests against various aspects of the indentureship system. The level of interaction amongst India, South Africa, Fiji and Mauritius emphasized the importance of the issues surround­ ing Indian emigration and the indentureship scheme. Once the issues which were raised in South Africa, Fiji and Mauritius, became intertwined with the nationalist discourse in India and this brought the Government of India directly into the indentureship issue. From 1915 to 1917, the policies of the Government of India and the British Imperial Government were influenced by the mass wave of agitation that existed in certain parts of the British Empire. At this stage, the question of the continuance of the labour scheme was taken up with the Government of India. Abolition no longer rested with the protests that were articulated at various levels and the termination of the system seemed inevitable but the final decision rested with the British Imperial Government. The indentureship system at this point became an issue between the Government of India and the British Imperial Government. NOTES 1. Statistical abstract relating to British India from 1860 to 1869, London, Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, 1870. 2. Statistics taken from Great Britain, Report on Emigration from India to the Colonies, Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press, 1860-1910. 3. T.R.H. Davenport, South Africa: A Modern History, Johannesburg: Macmillan, 1987, p. 117. 4. Government Information Office (South Africa), The Indian in South Africa, New York: Union of South Africa Government Information Office, 1946, p. 5. 5. Percentages calculated from figures given in ‘Notes on the Grievances of the British Indians in colony and the majority of them continued to be engaged in agriculture/plantation labour. South Africa’, 22 Sep­ tember 1896. Collected Works, vol. 1, p. 393. 6. Bill Freund, Insiders and Outsiders: The Indian Working Class of

Fighting the System

145

Durban 1910-1990, Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press, 1995, p. 6. 7. Census of Trinidad and Tobago, 1891, Port of Spain: Registrar General, 1891. 8. The Colony of the Cape of Good Hope also had responsible government with a Legislative Assembly. There was a population of app­ roximately 1.8 million people comprising 22 per cent Europeans and 0.5 per cent Indians while the majority of the population were Kaffirs. The Indians were mostly traders, hawkers and labourers. 9. ‘Notes on the Grievances of the British Indians in South Africa’, 22 September 1896, Rajkot, Collected Works, vol. 1, p. 403. The Transvaal had a population of approximately 778,000. Only 0.6 per cent of the population was Indians. The Indians were mainly employed as traders, hawkers, cooks, shopkeepers’ assistants and labourers. 10. ‘Notes on the Grievances of the British Indians in South Africa’, 22 September 1896, Rajkot, Collected Works, vol. 1, pp. 393-9. 11. ‘Letter to the Natal Adviser’, Pretoria, 29 September 1893, Collected Works, vol. 1, p. 62. 12. C. 7911. House of Commons Parliamentary Papers. Papers relating to the Grievances of Her Majesty’s Indian Subjects in the South African Republic, Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty, September 1895, Westminster: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1895, p. 50. 13. ‘Deputation to Natal Governor’, Durban, 3 July 1894, Collected Works, vol. 1, p. 152. 14. ‘Petition to Natal Legislative Council’, Durban, 3 July 1894, Collected Works, vol. 1, p. 153. 15. CD. 1684. House of Commons Parliamentary Paper. Despatch from the Governor of the Transvaal respecting the Position of British Indians in that Colony, Governor Viscount Milner to Mr. Chamberlain, London: Darling and Son, 1903, p. 581. 16. The Chairman was Mr. Abdoola Hajee Adam while the Secretary was Gandhi. 17. See, ‘Constitution of the Natal Indian Congress’, Collected Works, vol. 1, pp. 178-81. 18. Maureen Swan, ‘Accommodation and Resistance, 1890-1913’, in Surendra Bhana (ed.), Essays on Indentured Indians in Natal, Leeds: Peepal Tree Press, 1990, p. 131. 19. C. 1115. Report of the Royal Commissioners appointed to enquire

146

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

into the treatment of immigrants in Mauritius, London: William Clowes and Sons, 1875. 20. See Florence E. Garnham, A Report on the Social and Moral Condition of Indians in Fiji, Sydney: The Kingston Press, 1918. 21. For more on the story of Kunti refer to Brij V. Lal, ‘Kunti’s Cry: Indentured Women on Fiji Plantations’, in J. Krishnamurty (ed.), Women in Colonial India: Essays on Survival, Work and the State, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1989, pp. 164-79. 22. See John D. Kelly, A Politics of Virtue: Hinduism, Sexuality, and Countercolonial Discourse in Fiji, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1991, pp. 26-65. 23. ‘Deputation to the Governor; Petition from the East Indian National Association’, Port of Spain Gazette, 2 October 1897. 24. ‘The East Indian National Association’, Port of Spain Gazette, Tuesday, 7 September 1897, p. 5. 25. ‘Deputation to the Governor; Petition from the East Indian National Association’, Port of Spain Gazette, 2 October 1897. 26. Ibid. 27. Ibid. 28. ‘The East Indian Meeting at San Fernando’, Port of Spain Gazette, 14 September 1897. 29. Ibid. 30. ‘Deputation to the Governor; Petition from the East Indian National Association,’ Port of Spain Gazette, 2 October 1897. 31. Ibid. 32. ‘Minutes of the Legislative Council’, Port of Spain Gazette, 7 Dec­ ember 1897. 33. ‘The Indians will Move’ Port of Spain Gazette, 15 September 1897, p. 3. 34. ‘Thik Bat’, Koh-i-noor, 4 October 1898, p. 3. ‘Thik Bat’ when translated from Urdu meant ‘Straight Talk’. This was a regular section in the newspaper. 35. Koh-i-noor, 4 October 1898, p. 3. 36. For example, see Koh-i-noor, 4 October 1898. 37. ‘Emigration from Calcutta: A Year’s Report’, Koh-i-noor, 8 October 1898, p. 2. This article consisted of passages taken from the Govern­ ment Resolution on the Annual Report on Emigration from the Port of Calcutta to British and Foreign colonies. 38. ‘Sir William Robinson and Her Majesty’s Indian Subjects’, SanFernando Gazette, 8 December 1888.

Fighting the System 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45.

46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52.

147

Ibid. Port of Spain Gazette, 11 December 1889. CD. 5193, Sanderson Report, Evidence. Francis Evelyn Mohammed Hosein (1880-1936) was born in Arouca on 25 March 1880. CD. 5193, Sanderson Report, Evidence, p. 311. Ibid., pp. 385-6. Clem Seecharan, Joseph Ruhomon’s India: The Progress of her People at Home and Abroad, and How those in British Guiana may Improve Themselves, Kingston: University of the West Indies Press, 2001. Ibid., p. 67. Ibid., p. 70 Collected Works, Chronology, 1903. For more on Manilal see Dharmendra Prasad, Public Life of Manilal Doctor, Bombay: Rite-Print-Pak, 1992. K. Hazareesingh, History of Indians in Mauritius, London: Macmillan Education, 1975, p. 72. Ibid., p. 74. Benarsidas Chaturvedi Papers. See also Collected Works, vols. 2-3.

CHAPTER 5

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

… By March [1917], almost every group had rallied around the anti-indenture banner: Muslims and Hindus, Brahmins and nonBrahmins, Bishops and Theosophists, Swarajists and Moderates, ‘the best’ and the not-so-good Indians, Marwaris and villagers. Each group, for whatever reason, wanted indenture to end: most groups were eager to take the credit for ending it. The situation was critical.1

By the twentieth century, a voice of criticism had emerged against Indian emigration and the indentureship system emerged in India. In the initial stages, the voice was rather weak but by the beginning of the twentieth century, it began to take the shape of mass agita­ tion against indentured labour specifically. By the second decade of the twentieth century, it had acquired such intensity that the colonial authorities were forced to pay attention to it. This resis­ tance occurred at various levels within India. On the one hand, a movement existed at the subaltern level where individuals and organizations agitated against the system in the districts of recruit­ ment. On another level, there was a drama of ‘high politics’; a more organized effort to terminate Indian emigration by the Indian nationalists – one aspect of an ongoing struggle against British rule and colonialism in India where Indian emigration and the inferior status of Indians within the British Empire were emphasized.

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

149

Subaltern Mobilization: District Protests …The Government must be prepared for movements in this county which are definitely hostile to indentured emigration, and which yet remain well outside the scope of the penal law.2

Within the districts and villages of India, there existed a certain degree of awareness of emigration of Indians to foreign countries. This is clearly seen in the folk tradition of these areas. There were folk songs that told of loved ones who had emigrated. Some of these were ‘romanticized’ songs that spoke of Indian women pin­ ing for the return of their husbands and sons who had left their village to seek work in foreign lands. For example, the following song which was popular in the 1880s, in the districts of Shahabad and various other parts of Bihar and Bengal, gives the idea of the languishing loved ones left behind in the villages: The month of Asarh has commenced. The clouds have arranged their thick army. My beloved has left me deserted, and is sojourning some­ where. Pleasing is the month of Sawan, O friend, my beloved loves the month. What deserted damsel has enchanted him? My husband cometh not home. In Kartik I am writing a letter, causing tears of blood to flow (for ink). Go, O crow to the country where my beloved is, and tell him the tales of my woes. In Ag’han there is an empty bed, and alone I watch. My beloved is gone and sojourns in a far country, how, O friend, can I endure?3

In another song: In Jeth there is the searching for the bridegroom, and every one goes out to honour him, (wearing) tikulis of gold, and (adorned with) lines of collyrium. But what shall I honour, when my beloved is in a far country? In the month of Asarh, the asarhi grass is growing; people are cutting it and thatching their houses with it. Birds and the like are building their nests, but my beloved is dwelling in a foreign land.4

Other songs told varying tales of women pining for the return of their husband who has gone to another country. One verse stated,

150

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

‘If I had known, O covetous one, that you would go to a far coun­ try, I would have hid your paet under my cloth’ 5 and ‘in Kartik my love went afar off, and as I realized it I lament’.6 Some songs hinted at the disruption to family life that occurred when Indian males emigrated overseas. These songs told of the wives who have been left behind in the village and of husbands who married a second time. One folk song tells the story of Mahadev who returned after twelve years and informed his wife that he had married another woman.7 Another said, ‘O husband, I would rather lose the vermil­ ion on my head, than bear the pangs of being a co-wife’8 while one spoke of the man who was deserting the ‘young wife’.9 There were other songs, more directly related to indenture expe­ rience and which told different ‘stories’. Ex-indentured labourers who were repatriated to India sang these songs in the villages and districts. They painted a very dismal picture of the indentureship system.10 One Bhojpuri folk song, which was sung in the districts of Bihar by the end of the nineteenth century, expressed resent­ ment and a sense of being cheated: The arkatia came with promise and lies Oh! The suffering and the pain of the journey Few were there who did not cry Many preferred to die We were told that we were going to a land with so much gold Now that we are here, Oh! Our bodies are melting like gold.11

Indian villagers were certainly knowledgeable about Indian immigration. G.A. Grierson noted that there were two views on Indian emigration in the villages of Bihar. On the one hand, the villagers thought that, A coolie goes out for five years; that if he stays for ten, he gets a free return passage home; that he is well treated, his caste respected, and come home rich. The climate of the colony is delightful, work plentiful and high paid; and that stories, circulated some years ago, about mimiai ke tel (the oil extracted from a coolie’s head by hanging him upside down), are all lies.12

On the other hand, Indian emigration to the colonies became synonymous with stories of those who ran away from home and who never returned to India. Grierson observed that,

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

151

If any one’s sons or brother disappears and is not heard of again, after a family’s quarrel, it is at once concluded that he has gone to the Tapu, and nothing more is thought about it. In this way the colonies (very entirely without reason) get the credit of being a kind of limbo where every one goes who is lost sight of, and hence they get a bad name as a place where once a person goes, ten chances to one he is never heard of again.13

A different kind of consciousness of Indian emigration and indentureship was reflected in the attempts made to prohibit labourers from registering for the system or departing from the port of Calcutta. The annual reports on emigration showed that recruits were ‘claimed by relatives’ at the sub-depots and the main depot in Calcutta. For example, in 1884, six emigrants were claimed by relatives at the sub-depot (located in one of the dis­ tricts), while 15 were claimed at the main depot at Garden Reach in Calcutta.14 In 1898, fifty Indians were claimed by relatives at the sub-depots, while four were claimed in Calcutta.15 Thus, Indians were not always encouraging in the migration of their relatives. This was especially common in the case of married Indian women, whose husbands attempted to prevent them from emigrating and widows, whose relatives prevented them from registering for the labour scheme. There were other instances where individuals were actively involved in preventing labourers from registering for the system. For example, in June 1877 sixty-four Indians who had registered for the indentureship system in Cawnpore, with the intention of proceeding to Trinidad were taken to the Howrah railway station. The Government Agent for Trinidad, R.W.S. Mitchell complained to the Commission of the Burdwan District that the ‘coolies’ were, ‘Followed to the ghat by two of the railway pointsmen in uni­ form, who harangued the people on the evils which would result if they carried out their intention of emigration to Trinidad, and persuaded the coolies to go with them. In consequence of this forty-one coolies absconded with the pointsmen.’16 The labourers were persuaded against emigrating and Mitch­ ell wanted more severe punishment of the individuals who were responsible as he felt that dismissal from their jobs was not suf­ ficient. Cases like this one appeared more frequently in the records

152

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

of the Emigration Agent and the magistrates of the districts after 1900; either these cases occurred more regularly and were treated more seriously by the colonial officers or the officers were more thorough record-keepers than in previous years. At the beginning of the twentieth century, a different level of consciousness emerged in the provinces and districts resulting in increased efforts to prohibit the registration of labourers under the indentureship scheme. By 1915, a campaign to stop the emigra­ tion of indentured labourers to overseas colonies had developed in some districts. This campaign targeted the labouring population specifically. The campaigners comprised a class of individuals who attempted to reach the labouring population and whose activities were centered on the potential migrants themselves. This campaign was dominated by the activities of the Indian Coolie Protection Society, also called the Anti-Indentured Emi­ gration League of Bengal. Some historians such as Tinker, referred to the Indian Coolie Protection Society and the Anti-Indentured Emigration League of Bengal as two different organizations.17 However, after some investigation, the Emigration Agent at Benares, A. Marsden and the Hon’ble Mr. James Donald, and ICS offi­ cer and the Secretary to the Government of Bengal (Financial Department) concluded that it was in fact the same organization operating under the name of the Indian Coolie Protection Society or the Anti-Indentured Emigration League of Bengal. This asso­ ciation was founded by Marwaris especially with the objective of preventing Indians from emigrating to the colonies as indentured labourers.18 It operated from Calcutta and concentrated its activi­ ties at the depots where potential emigrants were housed until embarkation and in the villages most susceptible to the efforts of the recruiters. The association was actively engaged in the dissemi­ nation of information to the labouring population, distributing pamphlets throughout the districts of the United Provinces, Bihar and Orissa (particularly Patna, Muzaffarpur and Darbhanga). These pamphlets, written in the vernacular languages, were strongly worded and for the most part served as warning notices to the labouring population. They referred to the colonies and

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

153

appeared to be familiar with the recruiting practices of the arka­ tias.19 For example, one pamphlet urged: ‘ESCAPE FROM DECEIVERS’ ESCAPE FROM DECIEVERS

ESCAPE FROM THE DEPÔT PEOPLE

Beware!

Beware!

Beware!

It is not service. It is woe. Do not fall into their snare. They will ruin you. You will weep you life along. Instead of rupees, rubbish will fall (on you). They are taking you across the Sea! To Mauritius, to Demerara, to Fiji, to Jamaica, to Trinidad, to Honduras. They are not islands; they are hell. Do not go by mistake. By exciting your greed for money they will destroy your caste. There you will have to break stones. On board ship people only get one seer of water in twenty-four hours. At stations, on pilgrimages, in Dharmsalas, in the bazar they will ask you if you want employment. They have no employment to give. They will take you to Calcutta where by contract They will sell you into the hands of the Sahibs. These men are given money to deceive people. They delude them with sweet words and sweetmeat. Fall not into their snare. Do not listen to their words. These men are to be found everywhere. Pro­ claim this loudly in all villages. The petitioner Purshottam Das, Vaishnav ----------------------------------------Muzaffarpur

(let anyone who wishes, ask for this notice Free of Charge)

Every literate brother is prayed to read this to his illiterate brethren and sisters. It will be as meritorious as a yajna. Narayan Press, Muzaffarpur, no. 68-6-6-15-20,000.

154

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Purushottam Das, ‘Escape from Deceivers’, Correspondence between the Government Emigration Agency, Sudha-Kanan, Englishia Line, Benares and the Colonial Office, 23 July 1914. Proceedings of the Department of Com­ merce and Industry, December 1915.

Another pamphlet stated:

SAVE YOURSELF FROM DEPOT WALLAS Save yourself from depot wallas. Be careful!!!

Be careful!!!

Be careful!!!

It is not a service but pure deception. Don’t get enmeshed in their meshes, you will repent. They take you over seas!!! To Jamaica, Fiji, Damra, Mauritius, British Guiana, Trinidad and Honduras. They are not colonies but jails. Save, be careful from depot wallas. They spoil your religion under pretence of service. Don’t hear sweat (sic) talks, they are your enemies Dear Brothers You will find these ‘arkatis’ at the station, at the bazar and enquire if you

are in need of service. They have not got services to offer. They will take

you to Calcutta and sell you in other people’s hands on agreement.

They get money for this, with inducing talks, by offering sweats [sic] they

induce you.

They say they will offer you service. They take you to the sahibs.

Don’t entangle yourself with their cajolings.

Don’t hear what they say, don’t stand near them. They have sub-depots

and agencies everywhere. Wherever you go be careful of these people,

don’t forget. Circulate this news to all villages.

Satyadeva

Satya Granthamala, Jhonstonegunj, Allahabad

Printed at Swadharma Pracharak Press

Delhi.20

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

155

The author of this pamphlet was an individual called Satya­ deva of Allahabad. The pamphlet was printed in Delhi and then transported to the districts for distribution. This suggests that the individual or group had some financial backing or means whereby the printing of the pamphlets were funded and that some amount of organization went into the activities of the association; it may not have been just a random act. What is also interesting is that the author’s name as well as residence is very openly stated in the pamphlets which signifies that the members of the association did not see the need to have a clandestine campaign or were deter­ mined to conduct their ‘awareness programmes’ regardless of the consequences. In 1915 the Secretary to the Government of Bihar and Orissa noted that 20,000 pamphlets had been printed in Hindi, and had been widely distributed in the districts of Bihar and Orissa, con­ centrating on the Muzaffarpur area. This shows the extent to which the ‘education campaign’ was taken seriously and the strong desire to educate the general labouring population and to alert them to the activities of the recruiters. The petitioner was one Purshottam Das. It cannot be determined whether Das belonged to any asso­ ciation or not but it is quite apparent that he was making a firm effort to discourage the potential emigrants. In addition to the distribution of pamphlets, the campaign included public meetings and lectures in the villages of United Provinces, Bihar and Orissa and other areas targeted by the recruit­ ers. These meetings and lectures normally occurred in market places and squares and were always in the vernacular languages. The Government Emigration Agent in Benares noted in 1914 that, The lecturers are systematically taking the towns in rotation, and so far have held meetings in Allahabad and Delhi and are now engaged in lecturing in Muttra, much to the alarm of recruiters, whose work has naturally stopped, and who go about in fear of attack from sympathiz­ ers.21

At the same time, there was an attempt to supplement the effect of pamphlets and public meetings and lectures with more active measure of dissuading those who had already registered for the sys­

156

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

tem and were awaiting embarkation. The colonial officers referred to this as ‘tampering with intending emigrants on their way to Cal­ cutta for embarkation’.22 The association’s aims were to secure the release of registered emigrants at the depot. Sometimes they would track the relatives of the labourers and accompany them to the Calcutta depot where they encouraged them to ‘secure the release’ of the potential migrant or either attempted to make the individual unwilling to emigrate.23 For example, a case was reported where an individual was recruited for the indentureship system and taken to Calcutta. During the time he spent in the depot, he attempted to influence other labourers to reconsider proceeding to the colonies and to de-register from the system. This individual was claimed by a relative prior to embarkation; the relative was accompanied by a member of the Indian Coolie Protection Society. There was also a case where seven women (three were going to Trinidad and four to British Guiana) were influenced by members of the association and decided not to embark when the ship was ready to sail. The Emigration Agent also noted that, ‘During a recent despatch of 100 coolies by train from Benares to Calcutta, in a reserved carriage, a number of Marwaris, who, I was informed, were connected to this association, attempted to enter our reserved bogie carriage at a station en route, after tearing off the reserved labels….’24 Upon the investigation into the ‘Movement in India to secure ter­ mination of Indentured Labour’ the Secretary to the Government of Bengal (Financial Department) reckoned that the associations have been able to secure the release of a few registered emigrants from the Calcutta Emigration Agency depots. The associations paid for the cost of sending these Indians back to their homes.25 He noted that the individuals who worked for these associations, Approached the Protector of Emigrants, Calcutta, with a view to obtaining the requisite passes for admission to the Agency depots and interviewing their representative’s alleged relatives. Failing this, they effected their object in two cases by applying to the Magistrate of the 24-Parganas district, who being unaware of the facts of the case, issued warrants in one instance and orders in another, for the detention of a few intending emigrants about to be embarked.…Their modus operandi seems to have been underhand intrigue with the subordinate officers of

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

157

the Agency, who not only secured the names of the intending emigrants for the purposes of the association, but also instilled into the minds of the emigrants ideas against emigration.26

While the motives of the Indian nationalists were very clearly stated throughout their campaigns – to abolish Indian emigration – it is not certain what the motives of these individuals and asso­ ciations were. They operated at a grassroot level and it is quite clear that they were attempting to bring about immediate changes in the system, that is, to discourage the villagers from leaving their rural areas. It could be suggested that they were interested in securing labour but this was not entirely true as they did not attempt to discourage labourers from migrating internally, to the tea planta­ tions of Assam, for example. One colonial report noted that the Indian Coolie Protection Society/the Anti-Indentured Emigration League of Bengal was influenced by caste prejudices and were ‘opposed on principle to Indians crossing the sea and so losing their caste’.27 The contents of the pamphlets strongly suggests that these individuals and associations might have felt that the manner in which the Indians were treated abroad was detestable and that the villagers were being conned into believing that their everyday situation would be improved if they left as ‘bounded coolies’. It also appears that the organization was well-funded although the source of the funding is not known. In fact, the Anti-Indentured Emi­ gration League of Bengal along with the Imperial Indian Citizen Association of Bombay paid for Rev C.F. Andrews and W. Pearson to visit Fiji in 1915 and to conduct ‘an independent investigation of indenture on the spot’.28 The colonial officials in the provinces felt threatened by the activities of these individuals and organization and in many cases they were unable to determine the specific persons/groups involved or their motives. The officers speculated that the bulk of the agitation in the districts/villages was instigated by members of the Arya Samaj or wealthy Marwaris. Marsden noted that the Arya Samaj was ‘constituted for the political and social regeneration of India’. It consisted of ‘over 100,000 members’ and exercised ‘no small influence throughout the Punjab and the United Provinces’.29

158

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Marsden offers no evidence to support his claim that the Arya Samaj was involved in the campaign against indentureship. He also named the Marwari Sahayak Samity of Calcutta as one of the organizations that opposed emigration but James Donald, the Secretary to the Government of Bengal noted that this society ‘was formed about two years ago with the object of promoting the moral, physical and intellectual advancement of Marwari boys in straitened circumstances’.30 At the same time, Donald was also confused; he noted that there was no proof of Marsden’s allega­ tions and that this society had ‘little to do with emigration and only assists persons whom it believes to have been enticed away by cooly recruiters against their will’.31 Anne Hardgrove stated that the Marwari Sahayak Samity ‘was formed in 1913 as a result of the politicization of the issue of Indian emigrant indentured labor’32 while Karen Ray wrote that the organization was instrumental in helping the newly indentured labourers to be released from their contracts.33 This campaign against the indentureship system had serious implications for the recruitment of labourers in the districts and villages of the United Provinces, Bihar and Orissa. In the first case, many arkatias were fearful of the rural population in these areas and completely ceased operation there. Second, the numbers recruited decreased considerably in some areas, so much so that the Emigration Agent complained that, Since opening recruiting operations for British Guiana and Trinidad at the new up country agency at Benares, the effect of this hostile crusade against Colonial recruiting has come home to a marked degree, and where sub-agents were formerly able to supply weekly 100 intending emigrants for British Guiana, and 200 for Trinidad, the numbers have now shrunk to one-half, showing every tendency of going lower, and complaints are coming in daily of the new difficulty which now besets recruiters. The class from whom the emigrants come has little experience of the world and is easily influenced and made unwilling and the mischief which is being disseminated amongst them is doing incalculable harm from a recruiting point of view.34

The Secretary to the Government, United Provinces also

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

159

acknowledged that the distribution of leaflets will tend to stop emigration. This was true not only because the recruitment of labourers was threatened but also due to the fact that the Indian Coolie Protection Society was able to discourage intending emi­ grants at the depot almost immediately prior to embarkation. Thus some ships were forced to leave with lower numbers or their departure was delayed while the recruiters attempted to replace the numbers who had deregistered from the system. Generally, this association managed to cause some amount of ‘confusion and annoyance’ at the depot and hindered the work of the emigration officer there. The campaign at this level was serious enough to be brought to the attention of all the branches of the colonial govern­ ment in the presidencies of India where labourers were recruited. It was considered a threat so much so that the Government of India had to be notified of the activities in the districts and villag­ ers and an investigation was launched to determine the individuals responsible as well as the manner in which they could be stopped/ prosecuted, if at all. The way in which this type of agitation was articulated differed from the agitation which occurred at the level of ‘high politics’ by the Indian nationalists in India. The Indian nationalists’ focus was on direct correspondences with the British Imperial Government and the Government of India. They held public meetings geared mainly for the interest of the educated Indians. They published extensively in newspapers and journals on the emigration of Indians overseas and the status of Indians in the British Empire and they attempted to bring about changes at a legislative level.

High Politics: ‘Abolish Indenture’ and the Indian Nationalist Discourse Sir, I rise to move: That this Council recommends to the Governor-General-in-Council that the Government of India should now take the necessary steps to prohibit the recruitment of Indian labourers under contract of indenture, whether for employment at home or in any British Colony. India is the only country, which supplies indentured labour at the pres­

160

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

ent moment. Why should India be marked out for this degradation? The conscience of our people unfortunately asleep too long, is now waking up to the enormity of this question, and I have no doubt that it will not rest till it has asserted itself. (1912)35

On 4 March 1912, Gopal Krishna Gokhale moved a Resolution in the Imperial Legislative Council calling for the prohibition of Indian indentured labour. Only twelve years prior to this, Indian emigration in general was not given any substantial amount of attention in the discourse of the Indian nationalists and the inden­ tureship system did not exist as a subject matter. By 1915, however, there was a cry to ‘abolish indenture’ which could be heard quite distinctly in the Indian nationalist discourse. The development of Indian nationalism can be seen as part of a lengthy historical process and nationalist sentiments changed over time. In its early stages a contradictory situation existed where the Indian nationalists criticized certain aspects of British imperialism but were collaborators with the British Imperial Government. In the late nineteenth century, anti-imperialist tendencies developed in India. The extent to which this occurred varied. Anti-imperi­ alist tendencies also changed according to the shifting demands of the Indian nationalists. In its initial stages, Indian nationalism existed as a critique of the British Imperial Government and was not an organized political movement against the British rulers. It was dominated by the middle-class intelligentsia and was largely concentrated in the Presidencies of Bombay, Madras and Bengal until about 1914. By the 1890s, the Indian middle class who had operated as ‘collaborators’ with the British Imperial Government were demanding certain ‘moderate’ concessions from the British rulers which appeared to be more beneficial to their class rather than to Indians in general. According to Anil Seal, In India understandings between the Raj and some of its subjects were a necessity if an off-shore island in north-western Europe was to govern hundreds of millions in South Asia. But these collaborators themselves varied both in their nature and in their intensity. Collaboration is a slippery term, which may apply at any level between acquiescence and resignation. Men who worked with the foreign regime did so for a vari­

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

161

ety of motives: the wish to keep a position of importance or the hope of gaining such a position, the intention of working for an attractive regime or the habit of working for any regime, however unattractive. But in the physiology of colonialism it is results not motives that matter; and all those groups may be classed as collaborators whose actions fell into line with the purposes of the British.36

For example, in the early stages, that is the period from about 1885 to 1905, the Indian National Congress (hereafter referred to as the Congress) declared its loyalty to the British Crown. Its demands did not extend further than the desire for a reduction in taxation and military expenditure, a need to assist Indian indus­ tries, to expand the foundation of the representative bodies and to raise the number of Indians in the privileged administrative offices.37 At this stage, nationalism developed as a reaction only to certain aspects of British rule in India; aspects which were in the interests of the upper-class, English-educated Indians rather than Indian society as a whole. In the beginning of the development of nationalism, the Indian intelligentsia acknowledged that the interests of Indians differed from the interests of the British and the Indians perceived them­ selves in relation to the British. Certain economic aspects of British rule were criticized as the basis of India’s poverty and the cause of economic stagnation. Publications such as Poverty and Un-British Rule in India by Dadabhai Naoroji (1876) and the two volumes of Economic History of India by Romesh Chunder Dutt (1901 and 1903) that attempted to show the extent to which British rule was draining the resources of India gave stimulus to this aspect of Indian nationalism.38 By the beginning of the twentieth century the desire for certain concessions was changed to the aspiration of self-dominion status like that in Australia, South Africa, New Zealand and Canada. Later on there were more changes, most important of which was a call for complete self-governance. It is important to note that the development of nationalism is merely one of the ways in which imperialism and colonialism have been contested. As Eric Hobsbawm noted, ‘In this subcontinent of almost 300 million inhabitants, an influential bourgeoisie –

162

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

commercial, financial, industrial and professional – and an important cadre of educated officials who administered it for the British were increasingly resentful of economic exploitation, political impotence and social inferiority.’39 While the common notion is that nationalism developed as a reaction to the repres­ sive and exploitative policies of the colonial state it is important to distinguish between the growth of nationalism as a political movement which challenges the colonial state and as a cultural construct which enables the colonized people to posit their dif­ ferences and autonomy. Before nationalism developed to the stage where it attempted to get rid of the colonial state in India some Indian nationalists had attempted to create a domain of sover­ eignty within the colonial state itself. The space was separated into two; one was the external material world, which was represented by Western supremacy, and the other was the inner space or the spiritual world that represented the national culture, which was to be protected and defended.40 Anti-colonial consciousness devel­ oped and was expressed as both political and cultural. In India, the growth of nationalist sentiments was both an invention of colonialism and a reaction to colonialism. The idea is that the colonial rulers were the ones who introduced an Eng­ lish system of education that was perpetuated by both the English and Indians. The proliferation of English-medium educational institutions in Calcutta and Bombay are a good example of this. This system of scientific education brought ideas of liberalism and rationalism, notions of self-government, ideas of freedom of speech, the creation of the press and socials reform. These in turn gave rise to Indian nationalism. According to Bipan Chandra, During the decades immediately following the Revolt of 1857, there was [a] general belief among the educated Indians – the rising leaders of the growing nationalism – that British rule in India was productive of con­ siderable benefits to its people. But with the lapse of time and as a result of increasing political activity and consciousness doubts began to arise about the value and material content of such benefits, though the positive aspects of the legal, constitutional and other non-material consequences of British impact were recognized and acknowledged by a section of the Indian national leadership.41

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

163

Sumit Sarkar noted that the central idea regarding the Indian national movement is, An English-educated ‘middle class’ reared by British rule, engaging in various renaissance activities, and eventually turning against their mas­ ters and so giving birth to modern nationalism – out of frustrated selfish ambitions, ideas of patriotism and democracy derived from western cul­ ture, or natural revulsion against foreign rule.42

Thus, one can see how nationalism was mainly engaged in a process of contestation. However, its form and expression changed over time so that Indian nationalism incorporated new ideas and developed new ideologies. By 1900, Indian nationalism was still in its embryonic stage rather than an organized political movement. It was mainly a tendency amongst middle-class educated individu­ als. The Congress itself was attempting to become an organized political party and while by 1905 the Congress was able to draw in the majority of the Indian middle class, it had not touched the masses.43 By 1906 the Indian national movement with the Con­ gress in the forefront, started its advocacy of swaraj and by 1915, the Congress was committed to the demand of immediate home rule with the support of the greater part of the intelligentsia. The changing nature of Indian nationalism is especially visible with respect to the situation of Indian emigration and specifically the Indian indentured labourers; the way in which Indian emigra­ tion was adopted and included in the Indian nationalist discourse changed as the character of Indian nationalism altered and devel­ oped over time.

Indian Emigration in the Nationalist Discourse The public meeting of citizens, Madras, views with alarm and repug­ nance the continuation of the system of indentured emigration from India, which is universally reprobated as being most detrimental to the moral and physical well-being of emigrants and felt as a standing stigma on the national self-respect of the people of this country. This meeting earnestly appeals to the Government of India and His Majesty’s Secretary of State for India to direct the immediate and unconditional abolition of the system and the total prohibition of indentured labour.44

164

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

When analyzing Indian emigration and the Indian indentureship system it is possible to distinguish three phases in the manner in which these issues were incorporated into the Indian national­ ist discourse. While the concerns and issues of these phases often overlapped there were also distinctions in the way in which the Indian nationalists adopted Indian emigration and the indentureship system. In the pre-1900 period to the end of the nineteenth century, the development of Indian nationalist sentiments had not yet evolved to a stage of mass mobilization or agitation against Indian emigration. In fact, Indian emigration generally did not occupy any place of importance in the Indian nationalist discourse and the Indian indentureship system was referred to occasionally. The main references made to Indians abroad were related to Indians in South Africa. This was due mainly to the work of Mohandas Gandhi in South Africa.45 Gandhi was concerned about Indians who were discriminated there on the basis of race. Gandhi himself had been a victim of racial discrimination in South Africa and had already begun his agitation for changes in the system, as it existed there. However, Gandhi started his campaign against the indentureship system more as a liberal and his campaign was centred on the fight against discrimination rather than on any political aspiration related to Indian nationalism at this point in time. In fact, by 1900 while Gandhi was agitating for an improve­ ment in the political status of Indians in South Africa, Gandhi’s concepts were now taking shape and these were closely connected to the issues dealt with by the nationalists in India. Also, in the later years, Indian nationalism was influenced deeply by Gandhian philosophy and Gandhi himself became one of the strongest pro­ ponents of Indian nationalism in India. He sought the aid of the Congress in bringing the indentured labour problem to the notice of the Government of India but at this time, the Congress had not developed any major interest in the Indians living outside of India.46 The topic of the Indian indentured labourers in the British West Indies in particular was not included in any substantial way in the Indian nationalist discourse at this point in time. When it was mentioned, it was by eminent Indians who were supporting

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

165

the export of labourers overseas. For example, in 1892, the general emigration of Indians abroad was the topic of a lecture delivered by Mahadev Govind Ranade at an Industrial Conference in Poona.47 Ranade’s paper entitled ‘Indian Foreign Emigration’ gave a ‘Sum­ mary of the History and Progress of Indian Foreign Emigration’. He noted the ‘practical utility of this great movement and its close relations to the Social, Economic and Political development of the country’.48 Ranade stated that ‘the rise in numbers of population could not only be solved, for the time being, by migration to the thinly populated parts of India and overseas; though industrializa­ tion was the eventual alternative’.49 Indian nationalists did not see any negative aspects of the system in the pre-1900 period. It was in fact viewed as one way of alleviat­ ing the problems associated with an increasing population, namely the pressure for land space and employment opportunities. In addi­ tion to this, the indentureship system was seen as another form of contract labour and hence as a system with measures in place to protect the Indian immigrants. At this stage, the stipulations of the contract itself were not questioned and the dehumanizing conditions of this system were not emphasized. This was probably due to the general lack of information on the system and on the conditions of the immigrants in the British West Indies. Up to this time, Indian nationalists were only aware of the system through Gandhi who was mainly responsible for communicating to India and to Gokhale and Naoroji in particular, about the conditions of Indians in South Africa.50 Direct reference to Indians in the British West Indies was not evident in the Indian nationalist discourse possibly because of the distance factor as well. The remote distance of the colonies from India meant that it took a longer time for information to be disseminated from the West Indies to India and vice versa than from closer settlements. For this reason, perhaps the relationship between India and the British West Indies was not as strong as that between India and South Africa. This meant that many Indian nationalists simply were unacquainted with the circumstances of Indian immigrants in the West Indies. Moreover, up to 1900 only two major reports on emigration

166

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

had been completed. The first, ‘Note on emigration from India’ was conducted by John Geoghegan in 1873. The second was by Major D.W.D. Comins in 1893.51 These reports painted a favourable picture of emigration in general. Comins’ report was one of the first to deal with indentured labourers in the British West Indies specifically. It reassured the Government of India that the Indian immigrants were generally doing well in the colonies, and that cases of neglect and ill treatment were the exceptions and not so much the norm. Furthermore, from the inception of the system of indentured labour the local Governments of Madras and Bengal – the ports from where the emigrants departed – kept annual reports on the emigration of Indians. However, these also painted a positive pic­ ture of the system. Given the framework in which the system was introduced, as a replacement to enslaved African labour, and the fact that the Anti-Slavery and Aborigines Protection Society in Britain was closely monitoring the system, it should come as no surprise that British officials in charge of the system emphasized the positive aspects of the labour scheme. Thus, these efforts to investigate the conditions of the labourers and the system were attempts by the colonial government to justify the labour scheme and the government’s decision to allow the export of Indian labour­ ers. It was also meant to weaken any criticism which might arise in Britain and in India and to justify British rule – by showing that indentureship was beneficial to the Indian population. Thus, on the one hand not much information was available on the Indians in the British West Indies and on the other hand, whatever infor­ mation was available presented the conditions of the labourers as favourable and the indentureship system as beneficial. Perhaps this was one reason why the Indian nationalists did not pay any particular attention to these emigrants. Also, the Indian immigrants in the West Indian colonies may have been overlooked as they were just a small minority in relation to the total population of India. For example, from 1842 to 1870, while approximately 351,400 Indians immigrated to Mauritius, only about 42,500 were indentured labourers in Trinidad, 79,000 in British Guiana and 15,000 in Jamaica.52 Added to this, the

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

167

Indian nationalists belonged to the privileged strata of the Indian social order and were more concerned with obtaining certain con­ cessions that were beneficial only to the Western educated, middle classes at this time. The Indian immigrants in the British West Indies were simply not needed in this effort and thus there may have been no motive to include them in the struggle against Brit­ ish rule. Indeed, later on, Indian nationalists were criticized for not recognizing the importance of the problems of Indian emigration. As one journal article stated, ‘Educated men have not turn their thoughts to it or they are unwilling to extend their sympathy to the Emigrants who till now belonged to a class, by no means rich or educated, but who still form the major portion of the Emigrant population.’53 In the first decade of the twentieth century, one can see the topic of overseas Indians creeping into the nationalist discourse. The period 1900 to 1910 can be referred to as the ‘formative phase’ for Indian emigration in the Indian nationalist discourse. It was at this stage that Indian emigration entered the Indian nationalist discourse in a more distinct manner and the Indian indentureship system became a point of interest. The racial discrimination of Indians in South Africa continued to dominate the nationalist discourse and when Indians in other colonies were admitted to the discourse this was done in comparison to the situation of the Indians in South Africa. Hence, one can see where the circum­ stances of Indians in other areas were assessed or analysed with reference to the situation in South Africa. A good example of this is seen in 1904 when reference was made to the British Guiana Ordinance. This ordinance was seen as comparatively better than an ordinance enforced in Natal regarding Asiatic emigrants, spe­ cifically the Chinese. It was noted that, The British Guiana Ordinance does not deprive the indentured man of the use of his intelligence. It does not insist upon the indentured labourer leaving the country on the termination of his indenture, nor does it reduce the immigrant merely to the status of an unskilled labourer by prohibiting him from doing anything else, or by prohibiting others from making use of him as anything else than an unskilled labourer.54

168

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Indian nationalists were pleased that the labourer in British Guiana was free to settle in the country after the termination of his indenture and to work as an independent man.55 This reinforces the idea that Indian emigration and the indentureship system in the British West Indies were seen as beneficial or that sufficient information to question the system was not available. It is important to note that Indian emigration and the inden­ tureship system was assessed and mentioned as one small entity in the political aspirations of the Indian nationalists. In this phase, the concept of swaraj was one of the subjects of the Indian nationalists. Swaraj at this time represented a movement towards self-governing status within the British Empire. Indian nationalists were agitating for the same rights and privileges of British citizens on the basis that Indians were British subjects and therefore should not be discriminated against in any part of the British Empire. Thus, the subject of racial discrimination of Indians was expanded to incor­ porate Indians in other territories namely Canada and Australia. By the end of the decade, it extended to include Indians who had emigrated to other parts of the British Empire, as information was now available regarding the conditions of Indians there. A report presented by the Sanderson Committee in 1909 gave information about the labour scheme. This Committee had been appointed to consider the general question of emigration from India to the Crown Colonies, the particular colonies in which Indian immigration may be usefully encouraged and the general advantages to be reaped by India itself and by each particular Colony.56 The report noted that in Trinidad, Ceylon, British Gui­ ana, Jamaica and the Seychelles the system was working to the advantage of the Indians and the respective colony. It did not recommend the re-introduction of the system to the Windward Islands where emigration had been stopped; it did not question whether or not the system should be ended in the Straits Settle­ ment and the Federated Malay States and it did not recommend the continuation of the system in Mauritius. It noted that it was necessary to make changes in the system for it to operate to the benefit of all in Uganda, British East Africa and Fiji. However, this committee gave its blessings to the system of Indian indentured

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

169

labour and to emigration in general. As the committee comprised mainly retired bureaucrats this should not appear as a surprise. In fact the delegate selected by and representing the Government of India, S.H. Fremantle, himself advocated the continuance of the system and defended the system of indenture arguing that immi­ grants were able to earn much more in these colonies than was possible in India.57 As the report of the Sanderson Committee provided informa­ tion regarding the situation of Indians in far off places like the British West Indies and Indian nationalists were now more aware of these Indians than they were in the previous decade. By this time, the India Office was conscious of the fact that Indian nation­ alists and other groups were monitoring the conditions of Indians abroad (probably because of the work of Gandhi in South Africa) hence, their intention was to publish this report to ‘allay the rising opposition to overseas emigration which is beginning to mani­ fest itself in India…’.58 By the end of this phase the emigration of Indians was becoming a topic at public meetings presided over by Indian nationalists such as one held by Annie Besant in Benares in 1910.59 At this meeting, a resolution was passed protesting the treatment of Indians in South Africa.60 This suggests that the topic of Indian emigration, though still largely restricted to Indians in South Africa, was not only included in the nationalist discourse but also was occupying a greater space in the public sphere. The years 1911-15 can be referred to as the ‘definitive phase’ of anti-emigration agitation as well as the inclusion of Indian emigration in the nationalist discourse. It was during this phase that Indian emigration and the Indian indentureship system were clearly defined in the Indian nationalist discourse. It was also the period in which anti-emigration agitation by Indian nationalists seeped to a local level as was evident in the protests at provincial branches of the Congress. During these years, Indian emigration overseas changed from a point of concern and actually became a major issue in the Indian nationalist discourse. This occurred in a variety of ways and for a number of reasons. First, it was at this stage that the demand for swaraj was fully consolidated and its advocacy reinforced. Most clearly discernible was the notion

170

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

that patriotism was contrary to empire and that Indians could not be patriotic to the British Empire when they were regarded as inferior. It was essential to remove indentured labour as it was a stigma on the Indian population. This was a drastic change from the attitude that existed prior to 1900 when the ‘collaborators’ were patriotic to the British Empire. One article in a Madras journal in 1914 stated, ‘… patriotism and empire were two inconsistent terms; that Empire carried with it the idea of subject peoples and that subject peoples could never be “patriotic” towards an Empire which meant to them only political subordination’.61 At the same time, the Indian nationalists were evaluating the position of India in relation to the self-governing Dominions and the status of India itself as a Crown Colony. There was a conspicu­ ous distinction between a colony and a self-governing Dominion. Whereas the Dominions were permitted to implement regulations and laws in their interest, it was felt that policies in India were solely geared towards the interests of the British Imperial Govern­ ment at the expense of the Indian people. Also, it was felt that India was contributing the most to the British Empire yet was treated as secondary and/or inferior when compared to the self-governing Dominions. India was not receiving the same ‘claims and rights of the self-governing Dominions’ despite the fact that ‘India has been contributing to the wealth of the British Empire and to the United Kingdom before and far much more than these dominions’.62 Indian nationalists also had problems dealing with what they perceived as the inability of Indians to travel freely within the British Empire. It was felt that Indians were discriminated against on the basis of colour, as mentioned previously with respect to Gandhi in South Africa. The protests of the nationalists continued to extend outside of the South African context but with a more calculated view to situate India within the British Empire and not just deal with concerns about racial discrimination. The fact that Indian nationalists took up the issue of the Canadian Immigration Law is a good case in point. In 1914 the Komagata Maru became a topic of interest. This ship had travelled from Shanghai to Van­ couver with 400 Indians on board. The basis of the journey was that the would-be immigrants were British subjects and this gave

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

171

them the right to enter Canada, a British dominion that admitted Japanese and Chinese but not Indians. However, the action of the Indians on board the Komagata Maru was seen as, ‘A direct con­ travention of the existing embargo placed on all labourers of every nationality arriving in British Colombia and in violation of the condition that the immigrants should arrive by continuous voyage from their place of origin.’63 The Indians were sent back to India.64 Many nationalists pro­ tested against the Canadian Immigration Law that was found to be discriminatory against Indians. The nationalists felt that Indians should be allowed to emigrate freely to any other territory, selfgoverning dominions or others. One such response was by Annie Besant who stated, ‘Complete freedom of movement between the habitants of all countries is desirable. In a civilized world all persons, who are healthy and who are not criminals or paupers, should have complete freedom of movement and of settling. Still more should this be the case within an Empire.’65 Inadvertently Indians abroad were drawn into this discourse – not just those who emigrated as free labourers but also those who went under the indentureship system. In the first place, the free­ dom of Indians to emigrate was a major point of discussion. In the second instance, it was felt that swaraj was the only solution to the kind of discrimination with which Indians were faced. If India was given self-governing status, it would then be able to promote its own interests. In the case of the emigration of Indians, there was the rising conviction that ‘unless they secured Self-Government on a much more national basis in India, the emigration problems would never be solved satisfactorily’.66 Also, the fact that India occupied a subordinate status in the British Empire was reflected in the category given to Indian emi­ grants abroad, free or indentured. This was seen by the mere fact that all Indians were referred to as coolies. Besant noted that, India, the granary of the world, is unable to maintain her surplus popula­ tion and thousands of her children like her raw materials, are sent away to other countries for employment for the bare necessaries of life. The immigrants, so absolutely necessary for the development of the resources

172

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

of South Africa, Australia and Canada, are treated there as helots and India is regarded to-day throughout the civilized world as the recruit­ ing ground for coolies necessary for manual labour. I do not hesitate to denounce this degrading system as the last relic of slavery within the British Empire.67

In a resolution moved in the Imperial Legislative Council, Gokhale as well noted that one of his objections to the system of indentured labour was that, ‘It is degrading to the people of India from a national point of view…. Wherever the system exists, there the Indians are only known as coolies, no matter what their posi­ tion may be.’68 Hence, with notions of swaraj on the rise, Indian nationalists were now uneasy about the status of Indians all over the British Empire and Indian emigration was included in their discourse under this matter of concern. By the end of 1914, the Congress reiterated the point that emigration was detrimental to the self-respect of Indians in the colonies and to India as a whole and passed a resolution, which advocated for abolition ‘… as early as possible, the system being a form of slavery which socially and politically, debases the labourers and is seriously detrimental to the economic and moral interest of the country.’69 During the period from about 1910 to 1915, the emigration of Indians overseas, particularly to far off colonies like the British West Indies, entered the Indian nationalist discourse very clearly as an attack on British imperialist policies. Emphasis was placed on Indian emigration and specifically the indentureship system as indicative of the negative aspects of British rule in India. It was during this period that Gokhale raised the question of Indian emigration in the Imperial Legislative Council70 and that a call was made to prohibit the emigration of Indian indentured labour; again by Gokhale in the Imperial Legislative Council.71 Some amount of attention was given to the economic aspect of emigration. It was felt that economically the system of indentured labour was fully geared towards the promotion of British imperial­ ist interests at the expense of India. Nationalists saw Indian labour on British West Indian plantations as necessary in maintaining low wages since it provided competition for the labour of the free

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

173

African population. Hence, by permitting the system of inden­ tured labour to continue, the Indians were also condoning British imperialism. On the one hand, it was impossible to overlook the imperialist actions of the British Imperial Government and on the other hand to demand self-rule. At the same time India needed to maintain its labour supply if it was to progress in agriculture and industry. As early as 1905, the India and Ceylon Chambers of Commerce held a confer­ ence at which they passed a resolution asking for a Government Committee to investigate the inadequacy of labour for organized industries and noted that the difficulty had become more acute every year. This conference and the subsequent resolution that had been ignored at the time was now brought into the nationalist discussion and used as ‘proof ’ that there was an increasing labour problem in India.72 It was at this point that ‘economic national­ ists’ added fuel to the debate emphasizing the structural basis of emigration. That is, British rule was identified as the main cause of the intensification of poverty in India. Nationalists further argued that the impoverished population may have sought emigration as an option in order to survive. During this phase, the dehumanizing aspects of indentured labour occupied much more space in the Indian nationalist dis­ course than previously. Moreover, free labour to Ceylon and the Malay states was condemned because of the bad conditions of the Indian labourers there. By this time, the Indian nationalists were provided with information by the reports which were done on Indians abroad. In 1913, another investigation was conducted by James McNeill and Lala Chimmanlal. It was published as the ‘Report to the Government of India on the conditions of the Indian immigrants in four British Colonies and Surinam’.73 McNeill him­ self was inexperienced regarding the issue of emigration and only qualified for the task in terms of his senior position. Chimmanlal on the other hand was specifically singled out by the Government of India as the ‘Indian delegate’ to accompany McNeill, as he was the manager of some tea plantations in the north-east and therefore had an idea of the conditions and terms of labour on plantations.74 Their report outlined quite clearly the situation of indentured and

174

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

free Indians in Trinidad, British Guiana, Jamaica and Fiji as well as the Dutch territory of Suriname. The report gave a favourable impression of the indentureship system in these colonies. The conclusions of the reports were largely ignored and the negative aspects of the system were used by nationalists as further evidence of the inability of the British Imperial Government to take care of its subjects properly. In the first instance the report, itself was withheld from the Indian public for a short while. National­ ists thought this was done because the report contained evidence detrimental to the continuance of the system. This resulted in continued criticism of the system. Second, by this time both the British Imperial Government and the Government of India had acknowledged the increase of nationalist agitation against the indentureship system and were attempting to dispel some of the apprehension associated with the system. Like that of the Sander­ son Commission, McNeill and Chimmanlal were sent to conduct an investigation, the chief intention of which was to show that the Indian immigrants abroad existed under satisfying conditions and that the British Imperial Government was doing all in its power to ensure that this continued. Chimmanlal was supposed to be the ‘officer of the Government of India’ who was ‘deputed periodically to the Colonies to report on the actual conditions prevailing there’ in order to ‘popularize emigration’.75 Regrettably, for the Government of India and the British Impe­ rial Government, these reports continued to provide information about the circumstances of Indians abroad, which were used by the Indian nationalists to highlight the negative effects of British imperialism for the people of India thereby lending credence to their claim that India needed self-government. The fact that there was more interaction with Indian emigrants also worked against the colonial officials. By 1915, some Indian emigrants had been repatriated to India; some nationalists had visited South Africa, Fiji, Mauritius and other colonies. More direct interaction between India and the colonies had opened up a great deal, as discussed in Chapter 4. Hence, information was disseminated much faster from various colonies to India and within India itself, especially with the rise of the press.

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

175

It was during this period that female Indian emigrants in particular, entered the Indian nationalist discourse. The dehuman­ izing aspects of the indentured labour system in general had been emphasized but as 1915 approached the circumstances of Indian women in the colonies were especially included in the discourse. The circumstances of those Indian women who emigrated under the indentureship system were presented as one of the most nega­ tive facets of British imperialism and propagated by nationalists to the extent that it dominated the press and public forums. Cases of sexual abuse and female abduction were projected as the norm more than as exceptions. The Indian woman, more so the female indentured emigrant was seen as the ‘Mother’ and the struggle against British rule was equated to that of the worship of the ‘Motherland’. The case of Kunti, a female indentured labourer in Fiji who was accosted by an overseer and punished for not responding to his advances received widespread coverage. In 1913, Kunti along with her husband was present at a public meeting in Calcutta, presided over by Baba Bupendra Nath Basu.76 Nation­ alists conveniently used Kunti’s case and the case of all female indentured labourers in order to emphasize the inability of the British imperial government and the Government of India to pro­ tect Indian women. Interestingly as well, not only was the British imperial govern­ ment under attack by Indian nationalists at this point in time but so was the Government of India. It was attacked for the neutral stance that it had adopted at the commencement of the Indian indentureship system and then for the lack of protection it offered to Indians abroad. Indian nationalists also called for the Govern­ ment of India to adopt a more pro-active attitude towards the system of indentured labour. The nationalists also gained some encouragement and the nationalist anti-agitation movement was further stimulated when Lord Hardinge expressed his sympathy towards the Indian emigrants and promised that the system would be abolished as soon as a scheme of free migration was developed to replace it. The years 1915 to 1917 can be seen as the ‘phase of consoli­ dation’ of the indentureship issue into the nationalist discourse.

176

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Indeed Indian emigration was given precedence in the nation­ alist discourse. The indenture issue was conveniently used by Indian nationalists to build a case for independence. Thus, antiemigration agitation had gained momentum and the issue of Indian indentured labour specifically occupied a central position in the nationalist focus. By 1915, there was a general feeling that it was time for the indentured system to be abolished. Emigration had stopped during the inter-war years and the Indian national­ ists had hoped that emigration would not be re-started. However, in 1915 emigration was re-commenced to British Guiana and this signified that the emigration issue was still alive and resulted in a fresh spirit of agitation.77 The Congress intensified its stance against the emigration of Indians and at the thirtieth Congress meeting in 1915 it re-affirmed a resolution passed at the previous session and urged for the abolition of indentured labour as soon as possible.78 During this phase the anti-emigration campaign attained an all-India level and meetings and other forms of protests were held throughout India. In 1916, the Congress urged that Indian emigra­ tion should be immediately stopped and that recruitment of such a form of labour be prohibited during the ensuing years.79 This cry was echoed by various organizations and at public meetings throughout India. In December 1916, a resolution was passed at a meeting of the Bengal Provincial Congress Committee. It com­ mended the Government of India on its decision to abolish the indentureship system and expressed the opinion that no other labour system should be implemented.80 Later that same year another resolution was passed by the All-India Moslem League, Lucknow demanding the prohibition of recruitment of labour and the termination of the system of indentured labour. It also called for the selection of an Indian representative to participate in the Inter-departmental Conference on emigration and asked for the ‘statesmen’ to consider the status of the Indian settlers in the self-governing dominions and Crown colonies.81 According to one writer in 1916, ‘A subject that was once considered worthy of discussion only at the Annual Session of the Indian National Con­ gress now finds a prominent place in the Provincial and District Conferences and even at Public Meetings.’82

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

177

From 23 January to 10 February 1917, eighteen resolutions were passed. Public meetings of citizens were held at Cawnpore, Poona, Belgaum, Trichinopoly, Ahmedabad, Aligard, Tuticorn, Benares and Allahabad. Speakers at each of these meetings expressed their conviction that the indentureship system should be imme­ diately abolished.83 The Home Rule League, the United Provinces Congress Committee, the Punjab Provincial Muslim League and the Kurnool District Congress Association either called for the immediate abolition of indentureship or asked that it be termi­ nated as soon as possible.84 During this ‘phase of consolidation’ there was an increased in the number of Indian women involved in the ‘abolish indenture’ cry as is evident by the public meetings of women held at Cawnpore, Ahmedabad and Kumbhakonam.85 The Widow’s Home protested against ‘the further continuation of the system of indentured labour which dishonours womanhood and has been officially admitted to be pernicious and degrading’.86 The women of Ahmedabad appealed to Lady Chelmsford, the wife of the Viceroy. Their resolution stated that, ‘The system of indentured labour under which Indian women are taken to Fiji compel them to lead a bad and immoral life and subjects them to indignities and outrages.’87 From 1915 to 1917, the nationalist discourse continued to emphasize the dehumanizing conditions of Indian indentured labourers as the negative consequence of British rule in India. The idea that continued to prevail was that British rule was the cause of Indians emigrating from India in the first place. Moreover, for the dura­ tion of the period of indentureship, British rule was unable to keep the Indians in suitable conditions. Therefore, British rule was detrimental to Indians and to India, and the moment had come when the system of emigration as well as British rule should be eradicated. By 1915 the emphasis was on the punishments Indians received while in the colonies and the need to include a clause in the terms of conditions of the Emigration Act, so that it would become mandatory for Indian emigrants to be informed about the penalties they would incur for breach of contract while in the colonies. The condition of women continued to be used by the nation­ alists in their attempts to end the system. In this year as well,

178

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

Reverend Charles Freer Andrews and William Pearson visited Fiji where they conducted an enquiry into the conditions of the labourers in that colony. They showed especially how the male to female sex ratio forced Indian women into a situation similar to that of legalized prostitution. The report of Andrews and Pearson resulted in a fresh spate of agitation in India. One of the major differences in the nationalist discourse at this time was the change in the demands made. The nationalists now demanded an immediate end to the indentureship system. In 1916, a motion for the abolition of the system of Indian indentured labour was delivered by Madan Mohan Malaviya and was accepted by Lord Hardinge. Hence, it was felt that it was a matter of time before the system was ended legally and that the British imperial govern­ ment and the Government of India were unnecessarily prolonging that moment. Hence, both the Government of India and the Brit­ ish Imperial Government came under considerable criticism from the Indian nationalists. In 1917, an Inter-Departmental Confer­ ence on Emigration was held in London to consider proposals for a new system of emigration to British Guiana, Trinidad, Jamaica and Fiji.88 The government of India was criticized for its choice of representatives, as neither Gandhi nor Andrews were included in the delegation despite the fact that they were the individuals most familiar with the issue of Indian emigration.89 The proposal was seen by Indian nationalists as another system of coercion with the tendency to be abused. It was felt that the system demonstrated the imperialist nature of British rule.90 In 1917, N.E. Marjoribanks and Ahmad Tambi Marakkaya were delegated to Ceylon and the Malay states to study the methods of recruiting and the conditions of Indians there. Their ‘Report on Indian Labour Emigration to Ceylon and Malaya’ did not pro­ nounce any judgement on the system but it did provide additional information for the Indian nationalists to use in their agitation. By 1917, the Congress noted, ‘nothing short of complete abolition of indentured labour, whether described as such or otherwise, can effectively meet the evils which have been admitted by all concerned to have done irreparable harm to the labourers’.91 In that same year Gandhi threatened to call for a satyagraha if the

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

179

indentured emigration system was not abolished by the end of March of that year.92 Thus, from 1915 to 1917 the emigration issue dominated the Indian nationalist discourse, as nationalists sought to build a case for swaraj and to gain support from the Indian population. The inclusion of indenture into its discourse meant that nationalists were able to expand the base of the Indian National Movement. Not only was the labour issue used conve­ niently to show the detrimental effects of British imperialism, it was also used to show that middle class Indians were fighting for the labouring population, in a hope that the labouring popula­ tion – the bulk of India’s population – would support the Indian National Movement.

Consequences The movement against indentured emigration in India … both deep and widespread; and is, in our opinion, justified.93

The British Imperial Government and the Government of India were forced to recognize the agitation of the Indian nationalists and other movements formed to abolish the indentureship system. At the subaltern level agitation posed an immediate threat to the emigration of indentured labourers and the colonial officers in the various presidencies were forced to adopt a more pro-active attitude towards recruitment. The prevalence of associations and the work of individuals such as Swami Satyadeva created an atmosphere of apprehension; initiated a series of correspondence amongst the provincial governments and propelled the government officers to launch a thorough investigation on this ‘movement to terminate indentured labour’. Agitation by the Indian nationalists created a more widespread furore and fuelled the Government of India into action. First, the Government of India was forced to recognize and pay attention to the campaign for the termination of Indian emigration. As early as 1911, the Government of India noted that, There is one matter to which we think that attention should be called, viz., the change that is coming over public opinion in this country in

180

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

connection with indentured emigration in general. There is no doubt that this feeling has gathered much strength in recent years and expression has been forcibly given to it in both the press and at public meetings.… The fact remains that a not inconsiderable portion of Indian opinion is more and more coming to believe that the system is objectionable and should be discontinued.94

The Government of India was coerced into implementing cer­ tain policies although these were geared towards appeasing public opinion rather than making structural changes in the system. For example, it suggested that the colonies which imported Indian indentured labourers, should be informed of the agitation taking place in India, so that measures could be implemented to allevi­ ate the conditions of the Indian labourers in these colonies. The Government of India noted that, If their indentured labourers have grievances which remain unredressed, capital is certain to be made out of the fact, the Government of India will be appealed to, and the continuance of the indentureship system will be seriously threatened. In view of the existence of the feeling to which we have referred, it behooves the Colonies, if they value the continuance of imported Indian labour, to take prompt action on the recommendations, which have been made by the committee….95

The Government of India was placed in a situation where it now had to placate the Indian nationalists. In doing so, it therefore gave legitimacy to some of the issues of the nationalists. The first major attempt to allay the fears of the nationalists was the publication of the report of the Sanderson Committee. The Government of India hoped that this would ‘do something towards preventing the agita­ tion from coming to a head’.96 The second attempt to placate the abolitionists was the delega­ tion of Indian officials to the colonies. The Sanderson Committee had recommended that Indian officials should be delegated to the colonies at periodic intervals to report on the conditions of Indi­ ans in these colonies. The Colonial Office supported this proposal and stated that it could not see any ‘objection from the Colonial standpoint, to the proposal that officers in the service of the Indian

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

181

Government should pay periodical visits of inspection to the Colonies’ and that ‘these visits will not be found to provoke oppo­ sition to the policy of encouraging emigration’.97 The Government of India on the other hand, did not think that there was a need for the delegation of officers especially at the ‘expense of the Indian taxpayer except when special circumstances arise’. In the end the Government of India grudgingly gave into the policy of periodical inspections and noted that it will ‘readily fall in with quinquennial visits or any other arrangement that the India Office may decide on … as the India Office however favour systematic visits … and think such a scheme may help to forestall criticism’.98 The Government of India acknowledged that agitation by Indian nationalists was important in drawing attention to the con­ ditions of Indians abroad. This agitation kept it (the Government of India) abreast of what was happening regarding these Indians.99 A good example of this acknowledgement can be seen with the campaign by the Indian Coolie Protection Society, which pointed out the involvement of the emigration officers in the recruitment process and the alleged mistreatment of emigrants. The Govern­ ment of India was forced to admit that emigration officials might have been involved in illicit activities and this was one of the reasons why it ‘must be prepared for movements in this country which are definitely hostile to indentured emigration…’.100 Rising agitation in India also forced the Government of India to adopt a more active role in the emigration process and to change its atti­ tude towards emigration in general and the indentured labourers in particular. The pressure placed on the Government of India forced it to accelerate its communication with the India Office and was there­ fore instrumental in bringing forward the actual date for the end to the system of indentured labour. Agitation by the Indian national­ ists combined with other pressure points such as the work of social reformers in India and anti-emigration organizations in Britain to create a massive wave of opposition to Indian emigration and the indentureship system. The existing historiography has largely ignored the pivotal role played by Indian nationalists in creating conditions for abolition to occur when it did.

182

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

The inclusion of the emigration issue in the Indian nationalist discourse had important implications for the system of inden­ tured labour as it created a scenario whereby the British imperial government and the Government of India were aware that Indian nationalists were monitoring the system. In response they adopted protective measures and monitored the system. The delegation of various commissions to investigate the conditions of the emigrants and the working of the system is one example of this. The mere fact that doubt was cast on the system was sufficient to throw a shadow over it and most important of all, the inclusion of this topic in the Indian nationalist discourse helped to accelerate the actual date at which the system was terminated. NOTES 1. Karen A. Ray, ‘The Abolition of Indentured Emigration 1916-1917. The Race for the Spoils’, paper presented at ISER-NICK Conference on Challenge and Change: The Indian Diaspora in its Historical and Contemporary Contexts, The University of the West Indies, Trinidad, August 1995, p. 23. 2. Government Emigration Agent, Benares to the Colonial Office, 23 July 1914. Proceedings of the Government of Bengal, Department of Commerce and Industry, December 1915. 3. George A. Grierson, ‘Some Bihari Folk Songs’, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, vol. XVI, pt. II (April 1884), p. 202. These songs were collected by G.A. Grierson during his tenure as Magistrate of Patna. He recorded the songs as they existed in the Bhojpuri language and translated them into English. The songs are generally sung by the women in the districts. This particular song is a ‘Barah Masas’ or songs of twelve months; each verse is dedicated to a month of the Hindu year. 4. Grierson, p. 208 5. Grierson, p. 244. 6. Grierson, VI, p. 220. 7. Grierson, XIII, p. 236. This song is a jhumar or purwis; a miscellaneous song, sung by women. 8. Grierson, XVIII, p. 246. This song is a jat’sar or song of the mill. It is sung by women while grinding wheat. The ‘vermilion’ referred to the red mark on the forehead which Hindu wives wear from the day of marriage and which distinguishes her as a married woman.

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

183

9. Grierson, VIII, p. 223. 10. This percentage was calculated based on statistics given in CD. 5192, ‘Report of the Committee on Emigration from India to the Crown Colonies and Protectorates’, Great Britain: June 1910, pp. 63-4. Hereafter referred to as Sanderson Report. 11. Kenneth Parmasad, ‘The Changing Socio-historical Context of Cultural Symbols in the Indian Community in Trinidad with Comparative Reference to the Bhojpuri-speaking Regions of India, 1845 to the Present’, Ph.D. diss., Jawaharlal Nehru University, CSSS/ SSS, 1993, p. 546. This is a translation of a song that was sung in the Bhojpuri language in the districts of Bihar. The words of the song suggest that it was composed by first generation indentured labourer(s) and was sung in the colonies. In a footnote, Parmasad expressed his gratitude to Prakash Deosingh from the Bhojpur district of western Bihar for providing the words and translation of this song. 12. G.A. Grierson, Report on Colonial Emigration from the Bengal Presidency, Calcutta, 1883, p. 18. 13. Grierson, ibid., p. 18. 14. ‘History of Emigrants between Registration and Arrival at Depot’, in ‘Annual Report of Emigration from the Port of Calcutta for 1883/8’, Proceedings of the Government of India, Department of Commerce and Industry, Emigration Department, 1885. 15. ‘Annual Report on Emigration from the Port of Calcutta to British and French Colonies for the Year 1898’, Proceedings of the Govern­ ment of India, Department of Commerce and Industry, Emigration Department, 1899. 16. Correspondence from the Government Emigration Agent for Trini­ dad to the Commissioner of the Burdwan Division, August 1877, Proceedings of the Government of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press, 1878, p. 616. 17. Tinker, p. 335. 18. The Marwaris emerged in the nineteenth century as one of the most prominent group of migrant baniyas, intermediary traders. They operated also as moneylenders during the colonial period and later dominated areas of trade, banking and commerce. The category ‘Marwari’ included individuals from the caste groups of Agarwals, Maheshwaris and Oswals. For more on the Marwaris refer to Anne Hardgrove, Community and Public Culture: The Marwaris in Calcutta c. 1897-1997

184

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

19. Correspondence between the Government Emigration Agency, Sudha-Kanan, Englishia Line, Benares and the Colonial Office, 23 July 1914, Proceedings of the Department of Commerce and Industry, December 1915. Also in Correspondence no. 11950-M, 13 September 1915, Ranchi from the Hon’ble Mr. E.L.L. Hammond, ICS, Secretary to the Government of Bihar and Orissa, Municipal Department to The Secretary to the Government of India, Depart­ ment of Commerce and Industry. Proceedings of the Department of Commerce and Industry, December 1915, pp. 741-50. 20. Satyadeva, ‘Save yourself from depot wallas’, Correspondence bet­ ween the Government Emigration Agency, Sudha-Kanan, Englishia Line, Benares and the Colonial Office, 23 July 1914, Proceedings of the Department of Commerce and Industry, December 1915. 21. Government Emigration Agency, Sudha-Kanan, Englishia Line, Benares to Colonial Office, 23 July 1914, Proceedings of the Depart­ ment of Commerce and Industry, December 1915, p. 741. 22. Ibid. 23. Ibid., p. 742. 24. No. 30, 269, Colonial Office to Indian Office, 5 September 1914. Proceedings of the Department of Commerce and Industry, December 1915, p. 741. 25. No. 322-T.G. Emig., Darjeeling, 14 October 1915, The Hon’ble Mr. James Donald, Secretary to the Government of Bengal, Finance Department to the Secretary to the Government of India, Depart­ ment of Commerce and Industry, Proceedings of the Department of Commerce and Industry, December 1915, p. 749. 26. Ibid. 27. No. 475, Government Emigration Agency, Sudha-Kanan, Englishia Line, Benares to Colonial Office, 23 July 1914, Proceedings of the Department of Commerce and Industry, December 1915, p. 741. 28. Benarsidas Chaturvedi and Marjorie Sykes, Charles Freer Andrews: A Narrative, London: George Allen and Unwin, 1949, p. 113. 29. No. 475, op. cit., p. 743. 30. No. 322-T.G., op. cit. 31. Ibid. 32. Anne Hardgrove, Community and Public Culture: The Marwaris in Calcutta c. 1897-1997 http://www.gutenberg-e.org/haa01/haa00. html, 24 April, 2003, Chapter Five, p. 10. 33. Karen Ray, ‘Marwari Politicization to Counter Village Victimization: The Anti-Indenture Struggle’, Shodhak, 17: 8 (1988), p. 89.

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

185

34. Chaturvedi and Sykes, p. 742. 35. Gopal Krishna Gokhale, ‘Prohibition of Indentured Labour, 4 March 1912’, Proceedings of the Imperial Legislative Council, vol. 4, p. 370. Gopal Krishna Gokhale (1866-1915) joined the Indian National Congress in 1889, served on the Bombay Legislative Council from 1899 to 1901 and was elected to the Imperial Legislative Council in 1902. He became President of the Indian National Congress in 1905 and in the same year he launched the Servants of India Society which advocated for the education of all Indians. 36. Anil Seal, The Emergence of Indian Nationalism: Competition and Collaboration in the Later Nineteenth Century, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971, p. 9. 37. Surjit Mansingh, Historical Dictionary of India, Bombay: Visions Books, 2003, p. 189. 38. Dadabhai Naoroji, Poverty and Un-British Rule in India, Delhi: Government of India, 1996, IV. Dadabhai Naoroji and Romesh Chander Dutt, The Economic History of India in the Victorian Age: From the Accession of Queen Victoria in 1837 to the Commencement of the Twentieth Century, London: Kegan Paul, 1903; and The Economic History of India Under Early British Rule: From the Rise of the British Power in 1757 to the Accession of Queen Victoria in 1837, London: Kegan Paul, 1901. 39. Eric Hobsbawn, The Age of Empire 1875-1914, New York: Vintage Books, 1989, p. 287. 40. This idea is taken from Partha Chatterjee, Nationalist Thought and the Colonial World: A Derivative Discourse, London: Zed Books, 1986. 41. Bipan Chandra, The Rise and Growth of Economic Nationalism in India: Economic Policies of Indian National Leadership, 1880­ 1905, Delhi: People’s Publishing House, 1977, p. 46. See also Bipan Chandra, India’s Struggle for Independence, Delhi: Penguin Books, 1989, pp. 31-81. 42. Sumit Sarkar, Modern India 1885-1947, Delhi: Macmillan, 2001, p. 5. 43. See The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, vols. 1-3, Delhi: Government of India, Publications Division. 44. CO 571/5, ‘Telegram, Dated 15 February 1916, from Sir Subra­ maniam Aiyar, Chairman of a Public Meeting held at Madras on the 15 September 1916’. 45. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1869-1948) was later referred to a Mahatma Gandhi. He lived in South Africa for twenty years where

186

46. 47.

48.

49. 50.

51.

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’? he agitated for equality on behalf on the Indians living there. He returned to India permanently in 1915 and started agitation there on behalf of the lower classes. In 1919 he persuaded the Congress to join in a non-violent, Non-Cooperation movement. For twenty-five years after this he was accepted as leader of the Congress. He became the leader of the Indian National movement and was able to mobilize millions of people from all classes. He was the editor of Indian Opinion, Young India and Harijan. His ideology included theories of ahimsa or non-violence and satyagraha or ‘the force which is born of truth and love or non-violence’. For more information refer to The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Delhi: Government of India, Publications Division, 1999. The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Delhi: Government of India, Publications Division, 1999, vols. 3-5. Mahadev Govind Ranade (1842-1901) joined the judicial service in 1871. He became a Judge in the Bombay High Court in 1893 and was appointed in the Bombay Legislative Council in 1885. He was a founding member of the Congress. He focused on raising the status of women through education. As editor of the Anglo-Marathi daily newspaper Induprakash, he propagated ideas on reforms in social customs, religious change as well as economic reforms. The Indian Emigrant, vol. 1, no. 5, 21 December 1915. The Indian Emigrant was a monthly journal published from 1914 in Madras. It claimed to be a record of the status and doings of Indians in British colonies and in foreign countries as well as an advocate of equal rights of British citizenship within the Empire. Its main objectives according to its first volume, were to give the Indian public a clear account of the relations which existed between Indians at home and abroad, to end the emigration of ignorant and uneducated labourers to distant colonies and to highlight cases of cruelties and injustice and to encourage voluntary emigration of educated Indians to places where there was a need for them. Tinker, p. 279. The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, vols. 2-10 show quite clearly the extent to which Gandhi corresponded with these two Indian nationalists. Gandhi regarded Gokhale as a ‘Rajguru’ or ‘prince of teachers’ and was deeply influenced by him. From 1904 Gandhi sent copies of Indian Opinion to Naoroji on a regular basis. J. Geoghegan, ‘Note on Emigration from India’, Calcutta, 1873, House of Commons Paper 134 of 1874 and D.W.D. Comins, Note

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

187

on Emigration from India to Trinidad, Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press, 1893. 52. CD. 5192, Report of the Committee on emigration from India to the Crown colonies and protectorates, Great Britain, June 1910, p. 3. Hereafter referred to as the Sanderson Report. 53. The Indian Emigrant, vol. 1, no. 5, 21 December 1915. 54. Indian Opinion, 11 June 1904. Also cited in The Collected Works, vol. 4, p. 20. 55. Ibid. 56. CD. 5192, Sanderson Report. 57. S.H. Fremantle was supposed to be the authority on labour problems in northern India. In 1906 he had prepared a ‘Report on the Supply of Labour in the United Provinces’. In 1912 when Gokhale moved his resolution in the Legislative Council calling for the prohibition of emigration, Fremantle was the representative on behalf of the Government. At that session of the Legislative Council he reiterated his support of the system. 58. CO 885/21, India Office to Colonial Office, no. 30 of 1911. 59. Annie Besant (1847-1933) began her life in India in 1893. She was interested in the cause of Indian political advancement and expressed her opinions in a weekly newspaper New India. She founded the Home Rule League in 1916 and was President of the National Congress in 1917. She was very active in the Theosophical Society and was founder of the Indian Boy Scouts Association, the Women’s Indian Association and the Society for the Promotion of National Education. 60. Annie Besant Papers, no. R-4799, 1 February 1910. 61. ‘Indians and British Citizens’, The Indian Emigrant, vol. 1, August 1914, no. 1, p. 40. 62. ‘Position of Indians in the Empire’, The Indian Emigrant, vol. 1, no. 3, 31 October 1914, p. 71. This article was summary of a lecture delivered by Mr. B.G. Horniman to the Students’ Brotherhood in January 1914. 63. The Indian Emigrant, vol. 1, no. 2, 30 September 1914. Canada had implemented laws that forbid the entry of Asians into the country as free and skilled labourers. For further information refer to Hugh Johnston, The Voyage of the Komagata Maru: The Sikh Challenge to Canada’s Colour Bar, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1970. 64. The Indian Emigrant, vol. 1, no. 2, 30 September 1914. 65. Ibid. Also recorded in Annie Besant Papers, no. R-4799.

188

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

66. The Indian Emigrant, Madras, vol. 1, August 1914, no. 1, p. 5. 67. Address at the 31st Indian National Congress, Lucknow, December 1916, Annie Besant Papers, NMML, Delhi. 68. Gokhale, ‘Prohibition of Indentured Labour,’ 4 March 1912. 69. Resolution proposed by the Honorable Mr. V.S. Srinivasa Sastri at the 30th Indian National Congress, 27 December 1915. Annie Besant Papers, NMML, Delhi. 70. CO 885/21, no. 30 of 1911. Gokhale asked a number of questions regarding Indians in Mauritius. Specifically he questioned the nonvalidity of marriages in Mauritius under Hindu and Muslim rites; asked for information on the annual emigration of Indians to this colony; reiterated the recommendation of the Sanderson Committee that emigration to Mauritius should be terminated and questioned the Government on the steps to be taken regarding this recommendation. 71. Gokhale, ‘Prohibition of Indentured Labour’, 4 March 1912. 72. The debate started with an article written in The Times (London) which alluded to the shortage of Indian labour. Comments and responses to this article can be found in various volumes of The Indian Emigrant, 1915. 73. This report was published by the Indian Commerce and Industry Department, Government of India, 1915. 74. CO 885/21, no. 67 of 1912. 75. CO 885/21, Department of Commerce and Industry, India, 1911. 76. ‘The Wails of a Woman’, Bharat Mitra, 1 August 1913. The manner in which the ‘Indian women issue’ was incorporated into the discourse on abolition is analysed in Chapter 4. 77. CO 571/3, Colonial Office to India Office, 26 February 1915. 78. Proceedings of the 30th Indian National Congress, Bombay, 27 Dec­ ember 1915. 79. The 31st Indian National Congress – Draft Resolutions, Lucknow, December 1916. 80. CO 571/3, ‘Resolution passed at a meeting of the Bengal Provincial Congress Committee held on the 13th December 1916.’ 81. CO 571/5, ‘Resolution passed by the All-India Moslem League, Lucknow, on the 31st December 1916.’ 82. Bharat Mitra, vol. 11, nos. 11-12, May-July 1916, p. 43. 83. CO 571/5, ‘Protests against the continuance of indentured emigra­ tion to the colonies.’

Agitation in the ‘Mother Country’

189

84. Ibid. 85. Ibid. 86. CO 571/5, ‘Telegram, dated the 29th January 1917, from the Superintendent, Widow’s Home, Cawnpore.’ 87. CO 571/5, ‘Telegram, dated the 5th February 1917, from Mrs. Ramanbhai M. Nilkhanath, President of a public meeting of the women of Ahmedabad.’ 88. Proceedings of the Government of India, no. 10294, Government of India, Department of Commerce and Industry, 1 September 1917, Simla. 89. CO 571/5, ‘Protests against the continuance of indentured emi­ gration to the colonies.’ 90. Proceedings of the Government of India, Colonial Office to India Office, 4 September 1916. 91. The 32nd Indian National Congress – Draft Resolution, 1917, Annie Besant Papers, op. cit. 92. Chaturvedi and Sykes, op. cit., p. 120. 93. No. 52 of 1915, The Hon’ble Hardinge of Penshurst, Government of India, Department of Commerce and Industry, Emigration, Proceedings of the Department of Commerce and Industry, December 1915. 94. CO 885/21, no. 30 of 1911, Department of Commerce and Industry, Government of India. 95. Ibid. 96. Ibid. 97. CO 885/21, Colonial Office to India Office, 21 March 1912. 98. CO 885/21, ‘Indian Emigration Memorandum – Minor Questions Affecting all the Colonies’, December 1911, 104. 99. CO 885/21, Department of Commerce and Industry, Government of India, 1912, p. 60. 100. No. 322-T.G., op. cit., p. 749.

CHAPTER 6

Imperial Re-considerations,

Policy and Abolition

This chapter shows the extent to which issues in the various colo­ nies impacted the policy-making process of the British Imperial Government and the Government of India. The questions raised by those who were questioning the system or agitating for the end of the scheme influenced the attitude of the colonial authorities. This chapter analyses the interaction that occurred amongst the British Imperial Government/Colonial Office, the Government of India and the colonies which imported indentured labourers. It also discusses the extent to which certain issues influenced changes in the logistics of the indentureship system and threatened the British imperial framework. It raises the question of India’s role in protecting Indian indentured labourers and India’s interaction with the British Imperial Government in the progress towards the final termination of the labour scheme. The levels of interconnections which existed amongst the labourimporting colonies, India and Britain proved to be detrimental to the indentureship system as issues in one territory affected other territories and consequently impacted on the imperial policymaking process. As mentioned in my previous chapters, Indian indentured labour was an imperial construct as labourers from one part of the British Empire were transported to another part of the British Empire in order to benefit British planters. Indeed, all the territories functioned under the British Imperial Government and indentured labour was sanctioned by the British Imperial Government. The British Imperial Government was therefore apprehensive that the anti-indenture campaigns in India, South

Imperial Re-considerations, Policy and Abolition

191

Africa, Fiji and Mauritius would threaten its imperial policies. It was also fearful that the anti-indenture sentiments in these territo­ ries would spread to the British West Indies and would threaten its colonial policies in that part of the British Empire.

The Role of Government of India The British Imperial Government dominated the system of inden­ tured labour as it operated throughout the colonies. Labourers were emigrating from an India that was under British imperial rule which meant that the regulatory powers of the Government of India were limited. In fact, the Government of India only operated as an arm of the British Imperial Government. As such, the British Imperial Government dominated the regulation and control of the Indian indentureship system and the powers of the Government of India over its people were always regulated and restricted. As John Gallagher and Anil Seal noted, Imperial purposes called for metropolitan control over the Indian empire. It also called for a control by the Government of India over its subordinate administrations in the provinces. London needed a strong central government in India obedient to it yet capable of keeping the lesser administrations in line with metropolitan purposes.1

In the early years of the Indian indentureship system the Gov­ ernment of India defined its role as one of ‘benevolent neutrality’ and it stated that, ‘Our policy may be briefly described as one of seeing fair play between the parties to a commercial transaction, while Government altogether abstains from mixing itself up in the bargain’.2 However, this self-imposed attitude of ‘benevolent neu­ trality’ was almost impossible given the fact that the Government of India existed as a branch of the British Imperial Government and as such it would hardly ever be able to maintain a neutral position in the labour scheme. Through the Act of 1858, London dominated Indian affairs and controlled emigration from India to other parts of the world. Theoretically, the India Office was meant to conduct some of the Indian affairs but an increase in communi­ cation between London and India resulted in London’s dominance

192

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

of Indian issues.3 In fact, under this Act of 1858, the Secretary of State for India was vested with the power to give orders to every officer in India including the Governor-General/Viceroy and to direct all the business relating to the Government of India.4 How­ ever, while the Government of India could inform the India Office of its policies towards Indian emigration, in the end the British Imperial Government could veto these policies whenever it chose to do so. Gallagher and Seal have noted that, ‘time and time again, viceroys and finance members in late-Victorian India protested at London’s dictation of Indian foreign policy’.5 The Government of India was placed in a problematic situation as it had to serve the metropolitan interests and at the same time look after its Indian subjects. Often, imperial concerns were given priority over Indian issues. The Government of India therefore acted as an instrument of the British colonial government and the entire concept of ‘benevolent neutrality’ which it adopted was pre­ dominantly a façade to create the impression that it was concerned about its Indian subjects in order to ensure the continuation of the system. In reality though, the Government of India existed more or less as a puppet of the British Imperial Government and the extent to which it (the Government of India) could have exhibited ‘benevolent’ tendencies was regulated by British imperial policy. In the earlier years of the system, the Government of India was a more active mechanism of British imperialism and viewed Indian indentureship as a necessary outlet for the increasing population of India. The colonial officers in India made numerous references to the need to encourage Indian emigration, the extent to which indentured labour benefited the plantations of the various colonies and the resulting prosperity of the labourers under the scheme. In fact, the language of imperialism/colonialism was reflected in the Government of India’s stance towards the labour system – Indian emigration provided an outlet for the increasing Indian popula­ tion; it was economically beneficial to impoverished labourers; labourers in the colonies were able to achieve economic benefits otherwise not possible if they had remained in India and so on. The Under Secretary of State for the colonies summed it up neatly when he said that ‘a system designed for furnishing a labour supply

Imperial Re-considerations, Policy and Abolition

193

has in this instance become a measure of colonization, beneficial to India and to the emigrants themselves.’6 By the 1880s, the colonial officers in India were beginning to examine the conditions of indentured labourers in different colo­ nies as various forms of protests were occurring in the colonies. However, at the same time, they were not critical of the scheme. In 1875, Lord Salisbury, the Secretary of State suggested that the Government of India should participate more directly in the indentureship system. Lord Salisbury’s intention was that the Gov­ ernment of India would … Offer greater encouragement to emigration, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, to obtain fuller information regarding the treatment of the emigrants in the Colonies and greater security against any unfairness towards them, either in the Colonial laws and regulations, or in the terms and conditions of their employment and treatment. …7

Lord Salisbury’s argument was that emigration provided an outlet for India’s large population, it afforded the population pro­ tection from evils such as famines and it gave opportunities for profitable employment. Therefore, if it was encouraged a larger number of Indian labourers would benefit. More so, as Lord Salis­ bury was aware, the British planters in the colonies would benefit immensely. Thus, Lord Salisbury enquired into ‘… whether there might not properly be a considerable change in the attitude of the Indian Government towards emigration; whether the Government and its officers might not more directly encourage emigration and the system under which it is conducted. …’8 However, at this time, the Government of India did not want to take a more active role to either recruit labourers or oversee the labour scheme. It took two years to actually respond to Lord Salisbury and stated that the delay was due to the ‘necessity of consulting local governments and administrations’ amongst other factors. The consultation with local units of the government shows both hesitation and caution on the part of the Government of India. Its response showed that it was aware of the limited con­ trol it could exercise over the scheme as the Colonial Office would always have full power. In fact, it noted that, ‘The Government

194

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

itself would be placed in a false and invidious position if they made themselves responsible for the prosperity of the emigrants in a distant country, and in circumstances over which they had no means of exercising direct and effective control.’9 It also made its position towards indentureship very clear when it stated that ‘the purely neutral attitude … has been consistently maintained by the Government of India during the past thirty years, and nothing has occurred during that period to suggest that any modification of that attitude would now be justified.’10 Not long after though, the changing attitude of the Government of India was visible. Prior to 1900 it reflected the imperialist dic­ tates of Britain, but by 1910 it was placed in a situation where it was compelled to re-think the indenture issue. As various Indian nationalists such as Gopal Krishna Gokhale and Madan Mohan Malviya questioned the labour scheme, the Government of India started looking at the policies of recruitment; sent commissions of inquiry to various colonies; and engaged in discussions with the Colonial Office to implement policies regarding the humane aspects of indentureship. This change in attitude was a direct result of the protests against Indian emigration which were occurring in the colonies and it was geared towards appeasing the protestors so that the scheme would continue. Up to this time indentured labour continued to be seen with imperialist spectacles – it was simply necessary for the continuation of the plantation economy of all the colonies involved. The scheme was terminated for economic reasons in those colonies which did not need labour such as Gre­ nada (1890) and St. Lucia (1893). However, for the other colonies relying on contract labour, the Government of India attempted to placate all parties involved. This was normally done on an indi­ vidual basis and as a problem crept up in a colony it was dealt with. There were no concerted efforts made to terminate Indian emigration to colonies which continued to requisition labour. It is important to note though, that although the Government of India began to take a more active interest in the system, at the same time it continued to support the indentureship system and still viewed it as beneficial to all parties involved. In the early decade of 1900, resistance by the indentured

Imperial Re-considerations, Policy and Abolition

195

labourers had gained the attention of the Government of India but policies were implemented to deal with these individually and the colonial authorities in India did not consider this level of resistance as detrimental to the system. The only exception to this was in Natal where emigration had been stopped temporarily as a consequence of the complaints of the repatriated Indians. The Government of India responded with deep changes to the system as it existed in Natal. After a commission of enquiry, Act VII of 1871 was passed with more distinct guidelines concerning recruit­ ing of labourers and severe penalties for unscrupulous recruiters.11 An ameliorative Act XIII of 1864 had been passed earlier with a view to curbing the problems associated with recruitment specifically. Despite the existence of this Act, however, numerous problems continued to prevail and hence the need for new legisla­ tion regarding the recruitment of indentured labourers. According to Robert A. Huttenback, ‘the complaints of the repa­ triated immigrants in the first instance turned the attention of the Indian authorities towards the cleansing of their own house’.12 It was the first signs of the Government of India’s recognition of the problems pertaining to the recruitment of labour and the first case where indentured labour was prohibited until the Natal colonial government and planters had instituted the proper infrastructure to cater to the needs of the labourers. Natal was an exception however, as protests by indentured labourers elsewhere did not yield the same results. The general imperialist perspective of the Government of India continued so that in 1912, when Gopal Krishna Gokhale raised the question of the termination of inden­ tureship in the Indian Legislative Council, the colonial officers in India were not ready to accept his suggestion. By 1915, the agitation in India and the other colonies was so strong that the Government of India could not continue to ignore it. The agitators were abreast of the situation in various colonies and were in fact educating the Government of India about condi­ tions of Indians in other parts of the British Empire. It was at this point that the Government of India was forced to acknowledge the dire problems associated with indentureship. The rhetoric changed from one of open support of the labour scheme to one which noted

196

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

that major changes were necessary if the scheme was to continue. At every level the colonial officers were acceding to the agitation movement. The Emigration Agent at Calcutta observed, At present emigration has probably not a single friend in India outside of the walls of the Emigration Agencies. The European community are either wholly indifferent to the subject or are opposed to it in the belief that it tends to deplete the supply of labour available for local industries; while Indian public opinion, in so far as such a thing can be said to exist, has accepted at its face-value the denunciation recently passed upon the indentured system by messrs. Andrews, Gandhi and their co-thinkers and would no doubt extend the same hostility to any alternative system that might be put forward. Indian sentiment, further, is generally opposed to over-seas emigration for caste reasons. It is difficult for the above reasons, to conceive of any circumstances under which a demand can ever arise in India for the future resumption of Colonial Emigration.13

The Government of India openly acquiesced to the pressure being placed on it when it noted that ‘Agitation has been steadily growing for many years past and has now attained to the status of a national movement in the face of which the Government of India are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain their avowed attitude of neutrality’.14 The change in the Government of India’s attitude has been attributed to the more liberal policies of some of its officers such as Lord Hardinge, who was the Viceroy of India from 1910 to 1916. While it is true that Lord Hardinge might have been more sympa­ thetic to the emigration issue, it is also true that he began his term in India at a time when indenture was becoming clearly defined in the Indian nationalist discourse and had already developed into a major point of contention in Natal, Fiji and Mauritius. Also, during his term as Viceroy the recruitment of labour for Mauritius (1910) and Natal (1911) was terminated and the call to end the system in the British West Indies, Fiji and the Dutch colony of Suriname was increasing in strength. Added to this, the volume of the agitation increased and the tone of the agitators was more aggressive. After 1910, the British Anti-slavery and Aborigines Society took up the indenture issue in Britain and the pressure was increased from all

Imperial Re-considerations, Policy and Abolition

197

sides. Lord Hardinge responded to this level of protests and was forced to acknowledge that the indenture issue would not be over unless the system was abolished. Lord Hardinge’s successor, Lord Chelmsford who was ‘less sensitive and sought to devise alterna­ tives to the condemned system’15 could not withstand the pressure of the agitation movement. However, the hands of the Government of India were tied and although one of the clauses of the Emigration Act stated that the Government of India was ‘entitled to prohibit emigration to any country where sufficient grounds may exist for so doing’,16 the Government of India required final confirmation of its policies from the British Imperial Government. In 1917, it noted that ‘the colonial officers in India were aware of the force of the agitation in India and in the other colonies and attempted to influence the decision-making process of the British Imperial Government’.17 By this time, the question of the termination of the indentureship system in the various colonies had entered a space beyond that of resistance by the labourers, Indian nationalists or the agitators in other colonies. It was now enmeshed in much broader issues of imperialism and national. The crusade against the scheme had created conditions whereby the Government of India was ready to accept the motion calling for the abolition of indentureship which was moved by Madan Mohan Malaviya in the Indian Legislative Council. The final decision however could only be made by the British Imperial Government.

British Imperial Policy The decision of the Colonial Office to terminate the Indian indentureship system in Trinidad, Jamaica, British Guiana, Fiji and Suriname was influenced immensely by the wave of agita­ tion which was taking place against the system rather than out of consideration for the labourers. The British Imperial Govern­ ment was concerned that the volume of agitation would interrupt British colonization and threaten British imperialist policies. The situation in South Africa reflected a direct contestation to British imperialism and white supremacy. The British Imperial Govern­

198

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

ment understood that racial tension in the colonies would be detrimental to British rule. James Patterson Smith summed it up when he noted ‘London decision-makers understood that any exacerbation of racial tensions in their colonies would be posi­ tively counter-productive’.18 Thus, it was crucial that Britain maintain its imperial policies, appeased the agitators and decrease threats to the British Empire. At the same time the Colonial Office did not want to deny the planters in those colonies which continued to demand contract labour. The idea then was to mollify all involved in the scheme. On the one hand, the British government could terminate the inden­ tureship system and therefore show that the imperial government did not perceive Indians as inferior and thereby maintain rule over India. On the other hand, it could devise a new labour scheme, a Scheme of Assisted Emigration, which would ensure the economic profitability of the plantation economy without offending India, the sending country. The British Imperial Government was fearful that the link­ ages which had been established amongst colonies would lead to increase threats to the British Empire. The contentious atmosphere in South Africa and India had spread to Fiji and Mauritius and the British government was apprehensive that the interaction amongst colonies would also extend to the British West Indies. In 1917, the India Office acknowledged the severity of the agitation in India and its impact on the indentureship system in Fiji and it noted that, Mr. Chamberlain … agrees that the prohibition for military reasons of further emigration under indenture does not in itself prejudice the resumption of emigration under a new system. But he feels bound to make clear that the state of opinion in India not only precludes the possibility of obtaining any more labourers from the Colonies under the existing indentured system, but is likely to offer serious obstacles for some time to come to the emigration of any more Indians to Fiji, if not to the West Indian colonies.19

It did not feel that a serious threat existed in the British West Indies. In fact the labourers in the West Indies were seen as a more

Imperial Re-considerations, Policy and Abolition

199

contented group, whereas the protests in Fiji were blamed on the work of certain individuals. It noted that, the special hostility being manifested in India towards Fiji is chiefly due to Messrs Andrews and Pearson’s visits to and reports on that colony. I admit that conditions may be worse in certain respects in Fiji than in the West Indies, as indentured Indian immigration is newer in Fiji, and the ex-indentured Indian has not settled down so thoroughly as a part of the community.20

At the same time, as long as agitation was taking place in other colonies, there was a possibility that the British West Indian labourers could be dragged into the abolition discourse. The Brit­ ish Imperial Government was aware of the level of interaction taking place amongst leaders in India, Fiji, Mauritius and South Africa and was apprehensive that closer relations would develop with these colonies and those in the British West Indies. One cor­ respondence from London stated that ‘We have evidence to show that Indians have recently been visiting and taking notes in some of the West Indian islands, and I suspect that the agitation in India will shortly be supported by unfavourable statements or allegations as to the conditions of the indentured Indians in these islands.’21 The political climate in Britain added to the manner in which the agitation against indentureship was received by the British Imperial Government. By the end of the nineteenth century, Brit­ ish imperialist policies were questioned and opposed by certain sections of British society. There were varying levels of discussions on empire and imperialism in Britain, and different groups and individuals in British society was rethinking the imperialist poli­ cies of the early nineteenth century. Colonization and labour were two topics included in the debate.22 The Liberals in Britain, for example, attacked the use of Chinese indentured labour in South Africa as it decreased the opportunities available for British work­ ers in that territory. Some liberals pointed out that ‘Chinese labour would enable the colony to produce goods that would flood the British market and imperil the security of jobs at home … the gov­ ernment’s next step might be to bring coolie labour into Britain.’23 After 1906, the Liberal party and some members of the govern­

200

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

ment engaged in a discourse of peace rather than imperialism.24 At the same time, the concept of empire and imperialism were undergoing change. As Andrew Thompson noted, ‘the meaning of imperialism inside British politics was not fixed. Rather, the terms “empire” and “imperialism” were like empty boxes that were con­ tinuously being filled up and emptied of their meanings’.25 Added to this was the increasing importance of labour move­ ments in Britain and Western Europe. In fact, the colonial government in Fiji warned the planters that the system was not viewed in a favourable manner by the ‘non-conformist party’ in Britain and that ‘its existence was only tolerated under stringent safeguards’. It also noted ‘any further agitation against reforms would only draw attention to the colony and might result in the curtailment or abolition of the system’.26 It was clear that the Brit­ ish imperialist attitude toward labour was changing generally. First World War had serious implications on the manner in which Indian labour was perceived. Emigration had been stopped tempo­ rarily and there were discussions of reserving Indian labour for the war effort. The British Imperial Government wanted to ensure that recruitment of labourers for the colonies was not actually affecting enrollment of Indians for the war effort. A letter from the Under Secretary of State for India at Whitehall in February 1917 stated, It seems clear that it is not safe to proceed with the despatch to the West Indies of labourers from India. But Lord Chamberlain is not yet in a posi­ tion to say whether the War Office will actually require Indian labour for France, the recruitment of which has been under discussion. In the meantime it would be safer to consider the question of the stoppage of ordinary labour emigration from India on the assumption that the War Office may require 50,000 men from India. …27

At the same time, while the nature of politics was changing in Britain, it was also changing in India and other territories. Ideas of empire and imperialism which led to the colonization of India were contested and redefined in the early decades of the twentieth century. As mentioned in the previous chapter, in India in particu­ lar, indenture became enmeshed in larger issues of nationalism and identity. Indian nationalists conveniently used the indenture issue

Imperial Re-considerations, Policy and Abolition

201

to denounce British colonial rule and to criticize Britain’s imperi­ alist policies in India. Agitation against the Indian indentureship system comprised one small aspect of the wider movement towards self-government but it was a crucial part of this movement. It aided immensely in the early development of notions of swaraj and it was during the abolition campaign that anti-imperialist ideas were concretized. The indenture campaign added fervour to the devel­ opment of nationalist sentiments in India and gave legitimacy to the criticisms of the nationalist leaders. It was partly responsible for making the Indian national movement a more broad-based one as the incorporation of the indenture issue in the nationalist agenda drew the labouring classes in the movement toward selfgovernment. Added to this, some of Gandhi’s theories of resistance were developed during the period of indentureship when he focused on racial discrimination of Indians in South Africa. A good example of this is the satyagraha ideology which he first used to defy the tax of £3 which free Indians were required to pay and which resulted in the Smuts-Gandhi agreement. It was during this period that the effectiveness of satyagraha was seen. The Viceroy of India had announced that the recruitment of labourers for the scheme was prohibited but did not give a final date for the complete termina­ tion of all indentured contracts. In March 1917, Gandhi threatened to hold a satyagraha if indentured labour was not prohibited com­ pletely. He informed the Government of India that ‘we shall picket the coolie ships if the system is not ended by the thirty-first of May’.28 The vehement protests of the Indian nationalists and the threat of satyagraha forced the Government of India to re-consider its decision and on 25 May 1917 the Viceroy publicly proclaimed that the indentureship system would be terminated completely and all contracts would be ended by 1 January 1920.29 It was also the issues in South Africa which drew the attention of the British Imperial Government to Gandhi’s methods of protests. Gandhi’s relationship with the imperial government developed during the abolition movement and in 1914, he visited Britain to discuss the problems faced by Indians in South Africa.30 The experiments in

202

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

South Africa were extremely important to the Swaraj movement in India. Not only did the South African experience present a direct threat to British imperialism, a threat which also developed in India and which was instrumental in gaining India’s Independence status while making Gandhi and Gandhian ideology popular in India. The level of interconnection amongst India, South Africa, Fiji and Mauritius influenced the emergence, development and growth of the campaign to end the indentureship system. The movement of Indians within these territories gave an international dimension to the protests against indentureship. However, the relationship of these territories with the British West Indian colonies was still in its formative stages. Linkages between/amongst India, South Africa, Fiji and Mauritius and the British West Indian colonies were not strongly established by the first two decades of the twentieth cen­ tury. A conscious effort to establish linkages between India and the British West Indies only came in the late 1920s when the Indian national movement in India became a more established movement heading towards self-government. At this point, Indian national­ ists attempted to gain the support of Indians outside of India and started to visit the British West Indian colonies. For example, in 1929 Pundit Jaimini Mehta visited Trinidad and gave lectures throughout the colony during which he called for the Indians in Trinidad to support the nationalist movement in India in its quest for swaraj.31 Even then however, the linkages of Trinidad and Brit­ ish Guiana with Fiji and Mauritius were mostly non-existent. A flow of ideas and persons from Fiji and Mauritius to the British West Indies or vice versa did not occur to any significant extent. There was always a possibility that networks could be developed though, and as such, the British Imperial Government was cau­ tious to prevent these as far as possible. Appeasing the protestors was one way of doing so. In conclusion, it is important to note that British imperialist interests were maintained throughout the indentureship period and at the end of the day the labourers served the needs of British planters. A good example of this is in 1914 when the shipping of labourers under the indentureship scheme was stopped

Imperial Re-considerations, Policy and Abolition

203

temporarily. While it was noted that it was dangerous for the ‘coolie’ ships to traverse the seas, the fact that Britain had hoped to use the labourers in the war effort is more significant. Britain had to ensure that men were available to fight on behalf of Britain, in this way the labourers would serve Britain in a more direct manner. The Indian indentureship system was always about fulfilling the needs of Britain and the Government of India was just a low voice in the background; all serious decisions came from London and as such, the final decision to abolish the labour scheme could only come from London. NOTES 1. John Gallagher and Anil Seal, ‘Britain and India between the Wars’, Modern Asian Studies, Power, Profit and Politics: Essays on Imperialism, Nationalism and Change in Twentieth-Century India, vol. 15, no. 3 (1981), p. 390. 2. Letter from the Government of India to her Majesty’s Secretary of State for India; Proceedings of the Government of Bengal, General Department, Emigration, Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press, 1878, p. 553. 3. Anil Seal, The Emergence of Indian Nationalism: Competition and Collabouration in the Later Nineteenth Century, Cambridge: Cam­ bridge University Press, 1971, pp. 1-15. 4. Imperial Gazetteer of India, 4, 36. 5. Gallagher and Seal, p. 391. 6. Letter from the Under Secretary for the Colonies to the Secretary of State for India, Proceedings of the Government of India, 1899. 7. CD. 5192, Report of the Committee on emigration from India to the Crown Colonies and Protectorates, Great Britain, June 1910, p. 7. Hereafter referred to as the Sanderson Report. 8. Sanderson Report, p. 7. 9. Ibid., p. 99. 10. Ibid., p. 11. 11. ‘An Act to Consolidate the Law relating to the Emigration of Native Labourers.’ 12. Huttenback, p. 9. 13. CO 571/5, Immigration 1917, Letter from the British Guiana

204

14. 15. 16.

17. 18.

19. 20. 21. 22.

23.

24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31.

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’? Emigration Agent at Calcutta to the Under Secretary of State, Colonial Office, 26 April 1917. CO 571/3, Government Emigration Agent for British Guiana, 26 February 1915. Tinker, 334. Memorandum no. 47867-11, Foreign Office, 5 December 1911, Proceedings of the Government of India in the Department of Commerce and Industry, 1912, Calcutta: Superintendent Govern­ ment Printing, 1912. CO 571/3, Government Emigration Agent for British Guiana, 26 February 1915. James Patterson Smith, ‘The Liberals, Race, and Political Reform in the British West Indies, 1866-1874’, The Journal of Negro History, vol. 79, no. 2 (Spring, 1994), p. 131. CO 571/5, Immigration 1917, Letter from the India Office, Whitehall, London, to the Secretary of State, Colonial Office, 4 April 1917. Ibid. Ibid. The Boer Wars in South Africa (1880-1 and 1899-1902) stimu­ lated much debate on the meaning of empire and the benefits of imperialism. Andrew S. Thompson, ‘The Language of Imperialism and the Meanings of Empire: Imperial Discourse in British Politics, 1895­ 1914’, The Journal of British Studies, vol. 36, no. 2 (April 1997), p. 166. Thompson, p. 171. Ibid., p. 147. K.L. Gillion, Fiji’s Indian Migrants: A History to the End of Indenture in 1920, Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 1962, p. 168. CO 571/5, Letter from the Under Secretary of State for India, Whitehall, 19 February 1917. Benarsidas Chaturvedi and Marjorie Sykes, Charles Freer Andrews: A Narrative, London, George Allen and Unwin, 1949, p. 120. C.F. Andrews, Fiji Indentured Labour [A supplementary statement], Calcutta, 1919. See The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, vols. 1-3, Delhi: Government of India, Publications Division, 1999. The East Indian Weekly, 2 February 1929, p. 4.

CHAPTER 7

Conclusion

On 13 March 1917, a telegram was sent from the Department of Commerce in Delhi to the Financial Department in Bengal, Calcutta. It stated, ‘Amendment to defence of India consolidation rules 1915. Yesterday inserts following new rule 16-B. No native of India shall depart by sea out of British India for the purpose of or with the intention of labouring for hire in any country beyond the limits of India, provided that the prohibition imposed by this rule shall not extend to any person or class or persons permitted so to depart by general or special license granted by such authority as the Governor General may appoint in this behalf.’1 The explana­ tion that accompanied it stated that labour meant unskilled labour and does not include any work or other occupation of the nature referred to in Chapter Eleven of the Indian Emigration Act 1908. It also stated that the ‘Object of rule as explained in the press com­ muniqué is to conserve man-power of India for purposes of labour connected with war. It is intended that prohibition of indentured labour emigration to the W.I. and Fiji should be absolute and immediate.’2 This announcement by Lord Hardinge, the Viceroyal of India was influenced by the cumulative impact of agitation at all the various levels in India and the labour-importing colonies which forced a change in imperial policy.

More Labourers Please: Scheme of Assisted Emigration In 1917, planters in Trinidad, Jamaica and British Guiana were apprehensive of the intention to end the scheme and they held meetings in Trinidad to discuss alternative ways of obtaining

206

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

a labour supply. They communicated their fears to the Colonial Office and requested an alternative system under which labour could be exported from India to those colonies, which needed a labour supply. The British Imperial Government responded by organizing an Inter-Departmental Conference on Assisted Emigration from India to British Guiana, Trinidad, Jamaica and Fiji. The meeting was held in London and the purpose was to consider ways to solve what the planters perceived an imminent labour problem. The result of this conference was the suggestion of ‘A Scheme of Aided Colonisation for Indians in British Guiana, Trinidad, Jamaica and Fiji’. According to the proposal, The new system will be entirely free, and the indentureship system together with the titles and characteristics attaching to it will be abolished. The system to be followed in the future will be one of aided colonisation, and its object will be to encourage the settlement of Indians in certain Colonies after a probationary period of employment in those Colonies to train and fit them for life and work there, and at the same time to afford a supply of the labour essential to the well-being of the Colonies themselves.3

The scheme was to be funded by the government of each colony concerned, ‘… out of a common fund raised by rateable contribu­ tions from the employers either (1) of all Indian immigrants other than those locally born, or (2) of an immigrant during the first three years of his residence, or (3) during the period laid down as necessary to qualify him for a free return passage.’4 The above scheme was not implemented mainly because of opposition by the Indian nationalists. The planters from British Guiana even sent a delegation to India to submit a case to Gandhi for the emigration of Indians to the West Indies. J.A. Luckhoo and Dr. William Hewley Wharton spent several months in India in 1919-20 and in 1924.5 Gandhi in turn sent Reverend C.F. Andrews to Trinidad and British Guiana to inspect the conditions of the Indians in these colonies. In an article ‘Indian Colonial Emigration’, written in the Madras Mail on 3 October 1917, Gandhi noted that on the question of assisted emigration from India to the colonies of British Guiana,

Conclusion

207

Trinidad, Jamaica and Fiji (not the self-governing colonies of South Africa, Canada or Australia, or the Crown Colony of Mauritius), ‘the substantive part of it which sets forth the scheme which is to replace indentured emigration is, so far as one can judge, to say the least of it, disappointing. Stripped of all the phraseology under which the scheme has been veiled, it is nothing less than a system of indentured emigration, no doubt on a more humane basis and safeguarded with some conditions beneficial to the emigrants tak­ ing advantage of it.’ Gandhi was concerned that the colonies were the ones to benefit, not the Indians and he stated, The main point that should be borne in mind is that the conference sat designedly to consider a scheme of emigration not in the interest of the Indian labourer, but in those of the colonial employer. The new system therefore is devised to help the Colonies concerned. The best thing there­ fore that can happen from an Indian standpoint is that there should be no assisted emigration from India for any type whatsoever. The industries of India crying out for labour.6

Ultimately, Gandhi was unsupportive of the planters’ requests and no other schemes were implemented to replace Indian inden­ tured labour.7

Main Issues of Abolition All over India meetings have taken place … demanding immediate and total abolition. It is probable that labourers will be prevented from embarking on recruiting ships and that recruiters will be molested. … We feel sure that your reply if published by us would provoke public feel­ ing, which have arrived at a pitch of high indignation already, to further exasperation, and we apprehend that serious disturbances, threats of which are already reaching us, may take place. Lord Hardinge’s speech meant, it was thought, a delay of about a year, and it would not help to mention the spirit in which the colonies have met us. We should ask in reply, why should India send its women to prostitution and its men to slavery? We ask you to permit us to stop recruiting forthwith in view of the widespread and growing agitation which had all the potency of a moral crusade.8

208

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

The form of articulation of grievances for all the classes studied was influenced heavily by positionality. The middle class were engaged in a more organized form of agitation and they used the press to articulate their grievances against the colonial govern­ ment and colonial rule in general. Agitation also occurred at a grassroot level, by the labouring classes who were seeking more immediate resolutions to their problems and issues. In all the areas mentioned; the British West Indies, South Africa, Mauritius, Fiji and India positionality in general and the class structure spe­ cifically influenced the politics of abolition which emerged. It also determined the types of grievances which were articulated, the manner in which issues were dealt with, the level at which issues were projected within the wider society as well as the actual out­ come of the agitation. The British Anti-Slavery and Aborigines Protection Society had provided an effective mechanism whereby slavery was portrayed as an iniquitous system and the labour force was compelled to work under extremely inhumane conditions.9 When the inden­ tureship system commenced it was under the watchful eyes of this society which was afraid that the system would become a rep­ lica of slavery. From the 1880s to about 1910 however there was a decrease in the volume of protests by the British Anti-Slavery and Aborigines Protection Society. From 1910 it regularly ques­ tioned the inhumane conditions of the girmitiyas. However it only adopted a strong anti-indenture stance in 1917 when it called for the complete termination of indentureship. The abolition of Indian indentureship was not influenced heav­ ily by the economic situation of the plantation system. Indian indentured labour was still economically viable and the plantation economies of the Trinidad, Fiji, Jamaica, British Guiana and Suri­ name relied on contracted labourers. However, new factors came into play such as the rise of nationalism and the emergence of the Indian middle classes. These questioned the use of unfree labour on the plantations and this agitation overrode vested economic considerations in the abolition process. Also, the termination of indentured contracts was serialized. Every year Indian labour­ ers would become free labourers. Added to this some Indians

Conclusion

209

immigrated as free labourers. Also, distinctions existed between Indians who were born in the colonies and those who immigrated as indentured labourers. This made the Indian social/class struc­ ture in the colonies a complex one so that the meaning of abolition differed according to the socio-economic position of the Indian. While abolition was greeted with some amount of trepidation by the West Indian planters the decision to terminate the scheme was received ‘with immense satisfaction throughout India’.10 Nationalist leaders who were campaigning for the abolition of the scheme viewed the Viceroy’s announcement as a major accom­ plishment for the Indian national movement and a step closer to swaraj. Abolition signified an improvement in the status of Indians within the British Empire and more importantly the British Impe­ rial Government’s recognition of this ‘elevated’ status. There was an increase in anti-British protests and an intensification of calls for swaraj in the immediate post-indenture period in India. The linkages which were established amongst India, South Africa, Fiji and Mauritius aided in the development of nationalism in India and added another dimension to the call for self-government in which nationalists in India were engaged.

Contribution of the Abolition Movement As mentioned in previous chapters, the campaign to terminate the Indian indentureship system was a transcontinental one. It incorporated all the territories in the British Empire where Indian emigrants (free and indentured) were present. In some cases, such as Canada and New Zealand, the Indians were not directly involved in the movement. However, individuals and groups in India and South Africa referred to situations and issues in Canada and New Zealand during the abolition movement. In countries such as South Africa, Fiji, Mauritius and India the level of articula­ tion of grievances developed into a major form of protests against British domination. Some of the issues emphasized by campaign­ ers in Trinidad and British Guiana were similar yet different from those articulated in South Africa, India, Mauritius and Fiji. In all these territories the extent of control over Indians and inhu­

210

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

man conditions of the labourers were questioned. However, the volume of protests in South Africa, Fiji, Mauritius and India was stronger than the campaigns in the British West Indies. In the for­ mer territories indentureship became embroiled in issues of race, nationalism, ethnicity, identity and freedom. In the British West Indian context, some of these issues were taken up in the agita­ tion discourse but the movement to terminate the labour scheme remained fragmented, sporadic and weak. In India in particular, indenture became enmeshed in larger issues of nationalism and identity. Indian nationalists conveniently used the indenture issue to denounce British colonial rule and to criticize Britain’s imperialist policies in India. Indentureship comprised one small aspect of the wider movement towards selfgovernment but it was a crucial part of this movement. It aided immensely in the early development of the notion of swaraj. It was during the abolition campaign that anti-imperialist ideas were concretized. The indenture campaign added fervour to the devel­ opment of nationalist sentiments in India and gave legitimacy to the criticisms of the nationalist leaders. It was partly responsible for making the Indian national movement a more broad-based one as the incorporation of the indenture issue in the national­ ist agenda drew the labouring classes in the movement toward self-government. Some of Gandhi’s theories of resistance were developed during the period of indentureship when he focused on racial discrimination of Indians in South Africa, such as his satyagraha ideology. In March 1917, Gandhi threatened to hold a satyagraha if indentured labour was not prohibited completely. He informed the Government of India that ‘we shall picket the coolie ships if the system is not ended by the thirty-first of May’.11 The vehement protests of the Indian nationalists and the threat of satyagraha forced the Government of India to re-consider its decision and on 25 May 1917 the Viceroy publicly proclaimed that the indentureship system would be terminated completely and all contracts would be ended by 1 January 1920.12 It was also the issues in South Africa which drew the attention of the British Imperial Government to Gandhi’s methods of protests. Gandhi’s relationship with the imperial government developed during the

Conclusion

211

abolition movement and in 1914 he visited Britain to discuss the problems faced by Indians in South Africa.13 The experiments in South Africa were extremely important to the Swaraj movement in India. Not only did the South African experience present a direct threat to British imperialism (a threat which also developed in India and which was instrumental in gaining India’s indepen­ dence status) but it made Gandhi and Gandhian ideology popular in India. The level of interconnection amongst India, South Africa, Fiji and Mauritius influenced the extent to which the campaign to end indentureship developed in these countries. The movement of Indians within these territories added an international dimen­ sion to the protests against indentureship. The relationship of these territories with the West Indian colonies was weak and the level of inter-connectedness amongst Trinidad, Jamaica and Brit­ ish Guiana with these countries was not strongly established by 1920. The campaign to terminate the Indian indentureship system in the various colonies influenced the manner in which Indians perceived themselves within the British Empire. Generally, Indi­ ans in the colonies were conscious of their status as British subjects within the British Empire. This was seen in all the colonies which were involved in the agitation movement. However, the extent to which the desire to eradicate a system of labour perceived as iniq­ uitous, inhumane or degrading to the labour force differed. The movement to terminate indentureship was just the begin­ ning of a movement towards the consolidation of an Indian space within the British Empire. The years immediately following the end of indenture represented the time when Indians were most politically conscious of their positions not only within the colonies where they were settled but also within the British Empire and in relation to India, a land many still recognized as the ‘Mother Country’. It was during these early years that Indians attempted to establish themselves and consolidate their economic and political position and status in the colonies. Where the indentureship system was concerned the politics of abolition appeared to be most instrumental in formulating the future situation of the Indians within the colonies and the rela­

212

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

tionships between Indians and the populations of other ethnic compositions. It also laid the framework for the way in which the Indian population would resist political and economic domina­ tion in the future and the manner in which Indians chose to adopt, portray and use cultural media to resist what they may have per­ ceived as economic and political domination. The present book differs in approach and interpretation from that of the existing literature on abolition. It adopted a struc­ tural approach and it located the entire movement to terminate the labour scheme within the context of British imperialism and showed the ways in which imperialism worked in the various ter­ ritories. It provided an analysis of imperialism, Indian emigration, the Indian indentureship system and notions of resistance and abolition – a combination which has not been fully analysed in historical writings. This combination is important as it enables a study of specific regions and territories within a larger structure. Indeed, an imperialist structure was common to all the territories where Indian indentured labour existed. First, it demonstrated the direct relationship between the Indian indentureship system and British economic imperialism. British imperialist policies led to the intensification of poverty in India so that Indian labourers from the regions and districts which were exploited sought alternative employment opportunities elsewhere. Consequently, some made the decision to migrate within India and to foreign colonies as contractual labourers. At the same time, the imperialist framework that existed enabled the transportation of labour from one part of the British Empire to another. Second, it analysed the relationship between the abolition of Indian indentured labour and British imperialism. The campaigns to ‘abolish indenture’ which developed in the labour-importing colonies were discussed and analysed within an imperialist framework so that the termination of indentured labour is seen as a wider campaign – as a contestation to British imperialism. The agitation against indentured labour in the British West Indies did not develop to the level where the protestors questioned the imperialist structure or colonial policies largely. While there were protests against the system by the indentured labourers in

Conclusion

213

British West Indies and the emerging Indian middle class (as well as other groups and individuals) these protests were not strong enough to lead to the termination of the scheme. The protests by the indentured labourers were often sporadic, individualistic and unorganized but the protests by the Indian middle class added an ‘Indian voice’ to the labour scenario and brought adverse publicity to the system. However, while the Indian middle class questioned some parts of the Indian Immigration Ordinance they did not call for the termination of the indentureship system. On the other hand, issued relating to Indian emigration and indentured labour adopted an anti-imperialist stance in other ter­ ritories. A good example of this is seen in South Africa where issues of racial discrimination against Indians were the basis of the abo­ lition discourse. This discourse developed into an anti-imperial, anti-British one. In India, Indian emigration and indentureship was enmeshed in issues of identity, nationhood and swaraj. While indentured labour was one topic in the larger discussions of impe­ rialism and empire, at the same time it was an important aspect of the contestation to British imperialism. In fact, issues pertaining to Indian emigration and the indentureship system were used to emphasize the call for swaraj and to extend the base of the Indian national movement. Third, the British imperial government was apprehensive that the anti-indenture campaigns in India, South Africa, Fiji and Mau­ ritius would develop into a major threat to British imperialism. It was also fearful that the anti-indenture sentiments in India, South Africa, Fiji and Mauritius would spread to the British West Indies and would threaten its colonial policies there. Thus, the British Imperial Government and the Government of India attempted to placate the agitators by making structural changes to the labour scheme and publicizing reports that were had been done on inden­ tured labourers in various colonies. . One of the major contributions of this book is the strong comparative approach to the analysis of abolition. It analyses the abolition process in various colonies: Trinidad, India, Mauritius, Fiji and South Africa. The structural framework which this thesis adopts enabled a precise discussion of the agitation which devel­

214

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

oped in these colonies. The comparative approach adopted allows for a more comprehensive account of the historical processes leading to the termination of the indentureship system as issues which developed in various territories are examined, assessed and evaluated. Because of this approach, agency is given to the entire aboli­ tion movement and not to one particular issue, class or territory. Thus, the cumulative impact of anti-emigration agitation is impor­ tant rather than the work of any one individual, organization or territory. All groups and individuals who protested against the system were therefore seen as influential in one way or the other, in the abolition process. Hence, the labourers and Indian middle classes in the British West Indies called attention to the system as it existed there. The Indian middle classes in Fiji and Mauritius emphasized the poor conditions of the labourers. The agitators in South Africa showed how Indians were treated unfairly. The campaigners at a district level in India prevented labourers from registering for the system and embarking for the colonies which consequently presented numerous problems to the recruiters. The Indian nationalists in India questioned the basis of the system and called for its immediate termination. The cumulative impact of all these protests and campaigns at different levels by various indi­ viduals and groups contributed to the termination of the system throughout the British Empire. At the same time, the comparative approach of this book gives a more comprehensive assessment of individual issues, factors and players in the abolition process. Consequently, certain issues or some agitators can be seen as more (or less) influential than oth­ ers in the abolition process. Hence, this research shows that while agitation against indentured labour occurred in the British West Indies this was not strong enough to influence a complete termi­ nation of the labour system in this colony. For example, a stronger wave of protests against indentured labour occurred in Fiji and Mauritius where the structure of the system was questioned. In these two colonies, issues dealing with female indentured labourers featured more predominantly in the abolition campaign whereas these issues were almost completely omitted from the British

Conclusion

215

West Indian abolition discourse. Additionally, the dehumanizing aspects of indentureship had been discussed and highlighted in British West Indies but not to the same extent that it was empha­ sized in Fiji and Mauritius. In the latter colonies, the protests of the Indian middle classes focused largely on the inhumane conditions of the indentured labourers but in the British West Indies, the Indian middle classes questioned parts of the Indian Immigration Ordinance which mostly affected their class and status. More importantly, this book gives a voice to the subalterns, that is, the lower classes of Indians such as the indentured labourers, ex-indentured labourers who resided in the colonies and those repatriated to India as well as the labouring classes in the villages and districts of India. It investigated the class and/or caste back­ ground of the agitators and it utilized a variety of media in order to achieve this such as folk songs and accounts from the labour­ ing population as well as pamphlets and district gazetteers. It also added a ‘gender dimension’ to the abolition of indentured labour. It emphasized the manner in and the extent to which issues per­ taining to female indentured labourers were incorporated into the anti-indenture campaigns in various territories, especially in Fiji, Mauritius and India. First, issues pertaining to female indentured labourers were incorporated into the Indian nationalist discourse in order to undermine British imperialism and to reinforce the movement for swaraj. Thus, while existing studies have looked at the problems which female indentured labourers faced from the time of recruitment to ‘settlement’ in the colonies, this book is an addition to the existing literature in its assessment of the extent to which these problems were discussed in the ‘abolish indenture’ campaigns which evolved and intensified in India, South Africa, Fiji and Mauritius. Second, it examined the ways in which Indian women were drawn into the abolition campaign. In India, middle class Indian women became involved in the agitation movement. They established associations, held public meetings and wrote to the newspapers and colonial authorities about the conditions of female indentured labourers in Fiji and Mauritius. By 1915, Indian nationalists were taking up issues pertaining specifically to female indentured labourers such as cases of sexual abuse and middle

216

Why Should We Be Called ‘Coolies’?

class Indian women in India were actively involved in the antiindenture campaign. This made the Indian nationalist movement a more broad-based one. In conclusion, it is interesting to note that in 1920, when Indian indentured labour ceased to exist in all British colonies and the Dutch colony of Suriname, Munshiji was in the process of estab­ lishing himself as a permanent settler in that colony. Like other Indians who migrated to the West Indian colonies as contracted labourers, Munshiji accepted that a return to India was not immi­ nent and became involved in what can be perceived as ‘settlement activities’, that is, he purchased land, his children were married and he started ‘planting roots’. Suriname became his home. In the same way Indian labourers in other colonies such as Trinidad, Jamaica, Fiji, Mauritius, etc., made those colonies their homes. NOTES 1. CO 571/5, ‘Amendment to defence of India consolidation rules 1915; insertion of new rule 16-B,’ Immigration 1917. Telegram from India, Commerce (Delhi) to Bengal, Financial (Calcutta), 13 March 1917. 2. Ibid. 3. No. 10294, Government of India, Department of Commerce and Industry, Simla, 1 September 1917. Proceedings of the Department of Commerce and Industry, Government of India, 1917. 4. Ibid. 5. Clem Seecharan, India and the Shaping of the Indo-Guyanese Imagination 1890s-1920s, Leeds: Peepal Tree Books, 1993 . 6. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, ‘Indian Colonial Emigration’, Madras Mail, 3 October 1917. 7. Benarsidas Chaturvedi Private Papers. 8. CO 571.5, From Viceroy, Commerce and Industry Department to Under-Secretary of State, Public Dept., India Office, London, 9 March 1917. 9. For more on the British Anti-Slavery and Aborigines Protection Society see Kenneth D. Nworah, ‘The Aborigines’ Protection Society, 1889-1909: A Pressure-Group in Colonial Policy’, Canadian Journal of African Studies, vol. 5, no. 1 (1971). 10. ‘Indian Indentured Labour. Abolition Decided Upon: Rejoicings in India’, The Times [London], 22 March 1916.

Conclusion

217

11. Benarsidas Chaturvedi and Marjorie Sykes, Charles Freer Andrews: A Narrative, London, George Allen and Unwin, 1949, p. 120. 12. C.F. Andrews, Fiji Indentured Labour [A Supplementary Statement], Calcutta, 1919. 13. See The Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi, Delhi: Government of India, Publications Division, 1999, pp. 1-3.

Index

abolition 177-8, 181-2, 190, 197, 199, 200-1, 207-15 agitation 13, 16-17, 23, 59, 62, 83, 132-4, 141, 143-4, 148, 157, 159, 164, 169, 174-6, 178-81, 195-201, 205, 207-8, 210-14 agriculture 28-9, 34-8, 41, 44-5, 75, 126, 128-9, 173; and Land Revenue 34, 36 Anti-slavery and Aborigines Protection Society 62, 77, 96, 166, 196, 208 arkatias 11, 60-1, 153, 158 Assam 28-9, 42, 157 Bagchi, Amiya Kumar 33 Bairoch, Paul 33 Bechu 112-13 Bengal 29, 31, 35-44, 46, 48, 64, 70, 83, 97, 112, 149, 152, 156-8, 176, 205 Bhattacharya, Sabyasachi 19, 35 Bihar 34-5, 37-46, 48, 64, 149-50, 155, 158 Bihar Gazette 64 Bipan Chandra 32, 162 Brahmins 45, 148 Brij Lal 21 Britain 31-4, 57, 59, 62, 74, 166, 181, 190, 194, 196, 198-201, 203, 211 British admiralty 15 British Empire 17, 21, 29, 30, 57, 74-5, 131, 140, 144, 148, 159, 168, 170, 171-2, 190-1, 195, 198, 209, 211-12, 214

British exploitation 31 British textiles 33 British Guiana 11, 12, 15, 18, 20, 21, 23, 28, 29, 40, 65, 88, 91, 94, 97-100, 104, 108-12, 115, 128, 135-6, 141-2, 154, 156, 158, 166-8, 174, 176, 178, 197, 202, 205-6, 208-9, 211 British imperial government 58, 69, 74, 83, 88, 96, 127, 132-5, 143-4, 159-60, 170, 173-5, 178-9, 182, 190-2, 197­ 202, 206, 209-10, 213 British West Indies 16, 17, 23, 59, 69, 75-6, 89, 111, 114-15, 119, 126-7, 129-30, 132-6, 142-3, 164-9, 172, 191, 196, 198-9, 202, 208, 210, 212-15 Buchanan-Hamilton, Francis 35 Calcutta 12, 14-15, 38-9, 41-2, 48, 57, 60-1, 64, 65, 67-9, 71-3, 76, 82, 91, 92, 97, 98, 104, 112, 140, 151-4, 156, 158, 162, 175, 196, 205, 216 Calpin, G.H. 22 Carter, Marina 21 caste 12, 29, 43, 45, 112, 150, 153, 157, 196, 215 Census 28, 43, 45, 50 chaprassis 60 colonial framework 17, 104 colonial office 65, 68, 73, 93, 102, 143, 157 colonial officers 23, 65, 67, 152, 156, 179, 192, 193, 195-7

220

Index

colonialism 15-17, 19, 90, 117, 148, 161-2, 192 comparative studies 19, 24 Congress 24, 133-4, 139, 161, 163-4, 172, 176-8 contestation 14, 16, 17, 89-91, 163, 197, 212-13 contract labour 16, 19, 165 contracts 13-16, 19, 30, 40, 63-4, 69, 75-8, 103, 105, 107, 110, 126, 129, 153, 159, 165, 177, 194, 198 control 21, 36, 49, 58, 65, 74, 77, 78-9, 88, 90-3, 95, 98, 115, 117, 130, 191, 193, 209 coolie 12, 15, 63, 64, 70, 96, 98, 104, 111, 131-2, 136, 148, 150-2, 156-7, 159, 171-2, 181, 199, 201, 203, 210 cultural resistance 23, 91-3, 96 deindustrialization 33-4 depot 41, 49, 57-8, 60-8, 92, 97, 104, 151-4, 156, 159 desertion 101-2, 105-6, 108, 110, 133, 138 districts of emigration 37-9 disturbances 23, 207 divide and rule 78 domination 16, 58, 74, 89-93, 96, 117-18, 209, 212 drain of wealth 31 duties 34, 112, 131 Dutt, Amitava K. 33 Dutt, R.C. 31, 161 East India Company 35, 44 East Indian National Association 137 economic exploitation 16, 30, 162 Emigration Agent 60, 71, 152, 155, 156, 158, 196; Sub-Agent 66 Emmer, P.C. 61 external migration 29 famine 36, 40-1, 43, 46, 49, 193 Fatima Meer 22 female indentured labourers 14, 21, 49, 135-6, 175, 214-15

Fiji 11-13, 15, 17-18, 21, 23-4, 29, 69, 89, 115, 119, 126-7, 134-6, 142-4, 153-4, 157, 168, 174-5, 177-8, 191, 196-200, 202, 205-11, 213-16 First World War 14, 200 folk songs 91, 97, 99, 100, 149, 150, 182, 215 free Indians 17, 65, 119, 127-9, 132-3, 137-8, 174, 201 French Guiana 29 Gandhi, Mahatma 22, 133-4, 142-3, 164-5, 169-70, 178, 196, 201-2, 207, 210-11 Garden Reach 62, 65-6, 151 gender issues 20, 48 gender quota 62 Gillion, K.L. 21, 24 girmitiyas 99, 101, 208 Gokhale, Gopal Krishna 23, 142-43, 160, 165, 172, 194-5 Government of India 12, 18, 23, 32, 38, 48, 63-5, 71, 96, 111, 119, 127, 132-3, 143-4, 159, 163-4, 166, 169, 173-6, 178-82, 190-7, 201, 203, 210, 213 Grenada 29, 65, 100, 194 Guadeloupe 29 Habib, Irfan 31-2 handicraft 34 Hassankhan, Maurits 20, 22 Historiography 18, 21-4, 30-1, 181, 90 Hobsbawm, Eric 19, 90, 161 home charges 32 Hosay riots 94-6, 118 Immigration Ordinance 60, 76-7, 83, 102-3, 137-8, 213, 215 imperial policy 20, 38, 50, 59, 132, 190­ 2, 197-8, 205 imperialism 15, 18-19, 30, 33, 37, 45, 50, 57-8, 74, 75, 88, 92, 117, 131-2, 134­ 35, 143, 160-1, 173-5, 179, 192, 197, 199-200, 202, 211-13, 215

Index imperialist 15-16, 18-19, 29-30, 37, 47, 57-8, 68, 88, 90, 92, 127, 136, 141, 160, 172-3, 178, 194-5, 197, 199-202, 210, 212-13 India 11-14, 16-20, 23, 28-35, 38, 42, 44, 48, 58-9, 62-3, 65-6, 69-70, 72, 74, 76, 87, 93, 96, 111-13, 116, 118-19, 127, 132-3, 135-6, 140, 142-4, 148, 150, 156, 159-66, 168-82, 190-216 India Office 32, 59, 118, 169, 181, 191-2, 198 India Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. 65 Indian Coolie Protection Society 152, 156-7, 159, 181 Indian Diaspora 21-2, 24 Indian middle classes 13, 15, 17, 126-8, 137-9, 141-2, 160, 163, 208, 213-15 Indian National movement 163, 179, 201-2, 209-10, 213 Indian nationalists 12-13, 17, 23, 58-9, 63, 111, 115, 119, 135, 143, 148, 157, 159-60, 162-70, 172-6, 178-82 Indian Ocean 14, 17 Indian Ordinance 66-7 Indian textiles 33 Indian women 21, 24, 48-9, 59, 62, 136, 149, 175, 177-8, 215-16 inhumane conduct 17, 116, 127, 208, 211, 215 internal migration 28, 42 Jahaji Bhai 105 Jamaica 11, 15, 29, 40, 96, 100, 109-10, 153-4, 166, 168, 174, 178, 197, 205-8, 211, 216 James Nourse Ltd. 15, 69 Joshi, P.S. 22 jotedars 35-6 kaffirs 129 Kelly, John D. 21, 24 Kunti 136, 175 labour 12, 13, 15-23, 28-30, 34-5, 47, 57-9, 62-8, 74-5, 77-9, 83, 88-91, 93,

221

98, 100-2, 107, 114-17, 119, 126-9, 134-5, 137, 144, 148, 151, 157, 159, 164-6, 168-70, 172-3, 175-9, 182, 190-6, 198-201, 203, 205-6, 208, 210-14, 216 labour-importing colonies 17, 37, 127, 190, 205, 212 land revenue 34-6 Laurence, K.O. 20, 23 letters to editors 18 logistics 16, 18, 58, 71, 83, 101, 104, 106, 113, 117, 190 Lord Hardinge 12, 175, 178, 196-7, 205, 207 Manilal Maganlal 142 Martinique 29 Marx, Karl 31 mass emigration 17 Mauritius 11, 13, 14, 17, 18, 21, 23, 28-9, 65, 69, 87, 89, 113-15, 119, 126-8, 134-5, 142-4, 153-4, 166, 168, 174, 191, 196, 198-99, 202, 207-11, 213-16 Medical Inspector 66 Munshi Rahman Khan 11, 22, 46 Naoroji, Dadabhai 31, 161 Natal 11, 13, 17, 29, 69, 87, 115-16, 119, 127-34, 143-4, 167, 195-6 Natal Congress 133-4 nationalism 15, 160-4, 200, 208-10 natural disasters 28, 46 newspapers 97, 138-9, 143 Northrup, David 19 North-West Provinces 37-8 old immigrants 14, 113-14 Oudh 37, 38, 39, 41, 44 outmigration 42, 45 overcrowding 70, 72-3, 136 Patna 39, 41-4, 48, 152 Peasants 36, 90 Permanent Settlement of Bengal 36

222

Index

plantation resistance 100 poverty 20, 31, 37, 87, 115, 135, 161, 173, 212 primary sources 18 profit maximization 58, 62, 66, 77 protector of emigrants 14, 57, 64, 66, 74, 87, 116, 156; of immigrants 63, 67, 96, 103, 107-8, 110, 117 protests 66, 77, 96, 105, 108, 110, 113, 116, 126-7, 132-7, 141, 143-4, 149, 169-70, 176, 193-5, 197, 199, 201-2, 208-15 Queen’s Proclamation 131 racial discrimination 12, 127, 131, 135, 164, 167-8, 170, 201, 210, 213 Ranade, Mahadev Govind 165 rational economic behaviour 47-8, 101 Ray, Karen 24, 158, 182 recruiters 40, 47, 57, 60-5, 95, 97, 136, 152, 155, 158-9, 195, 207, 214 recruitment 11, 13, 15, 20, 44, 48, 50, 58-65, 67, 97, 117, 135, 148, 158-9, 176, 179, 181, 194, 195-6, 200-1, 215 registration 42-3, 58, 60, 114, 130, 135, 140, 152 resistance 13, 14-15, 22-3, 59, 83, 87-93, 95-6, 99-101, 103-11, 116-19, 134, 137, 141, 148, 194-5, 197, 201, 210, 212 reunion 29, 65 Rose Hills riots 111 Roy, Tirthankar 33-4 Ruhomon, Joseph 141 Sanderson Committee 140-1, 168-9, 180 Saran 39, 41-5, 47-9 sardar 11 Satyagraha 134, 178, 201, 210 Scheme of Assisted Emigration 198, 205 Secretary of State for India 32, 41, 163, 192, 200 Sepoy Mutiny 47-8

Shahabad 39, 41-3, 48-9, 149 shipping 15, 68-9, 72, 202 Skerpi plantation 11 South Africa 12, 22, 29, 89, 127, 131-5, 137-8, 142-4, 160-1, 164-5, 167, 169­ 70, 172, 174, 190-1, 197-9, 201-2, 207-11, 214-15 St. Croix 29 St. Kitts 29 St. Lucia 29, 100, 194 St. Vincent 29, 110 strikes 23, 65, 105, 107-9, 133 structural changes 17, 45-6, 59, 180, 213 subaltern resistance 89 subalterns 14, 22, 24, 89, 148-9, 179, 215 sub-depots 49, 64-5, 67, 151, 154 sub-districts 38, 40, 41 surgeons 68, 71 Suriname 12, 29, 69, 196, 197, 208, 216 Swaraj 13, 163, 168-9, 171-2, 179, 201, 202, 209-11, 213, 215 Terms of Engagement of Intending Emigrants The Netherlands 74 Tinker 19, 23, 50, 152 traditional industries 34-5 trans-continental 13 Trinidad 40-1, 45, 47-8, 63, 67-8, 72, 88, 94-7, 100-10, 115, 118, 128-30, 134­ 43, 151, 153, 154, 156 unfavourable balance of trade 31 United Province 37-40, 42-4, 46, 152, 155, 156, 158, 177 Uriya Gazette 64 Vagrancy 114-15, 13-36 Vagrancy Law 114, 134 wages 14, 33, 47, 65, 76-7, 106, 108, 110, 114, 134, 172 widows 48-9, 151 zamindars 35-6, 90