Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T21:03:40.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Capitalist Agriculture and Labour Contracting in Northern Peru, 1880–1905

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

Michael J. Gonzales
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Latin Americanists have become increasingly intrigued with questions concerning rural labour and oppression. In recent publications, traditional interpretations of peonage, labour contracting, wage labour and other topics have been questioned by historians with access to new documentary materials. Peru has been the setting for much of this discussion because of the important changes which occurred during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and the unusual opportunity to understand them since the creation of the Archivo del Fuero Agrario.1

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Latin American Studies , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , November 1980 , pp. 291 - 315
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1980

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Much of the recent research on Peruvian agrarian history is reviewed by Bauer, Arnold J. in ‘Rural Workers in Spanish America: Problems in Peonage and Oppression,’ Hispanic American Historical Review, No. 59 (02, 1979), pp. 34–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 Works critical of enganche include: Sotomayor, Alberto Ulloa, ‘La organización social y legal del trabajo en el Perú,’ (Ph.D. Diss., Universidad de San Marcos, 1916), Chapter XI;Google ScholarDenegri, Marco Aurelio, La crisis del enganche (Lima, 1911);Google ScholarMostajo, Francisco, ‘Algunas ideas sobre la cuestión obrera (contrato de enganche),’ (Ph.D. Diss., Universidad de Arequipa, 1913);Google Scholar and de Zulen, Dora Mayer, El indígena peruano o los cien años de república libre e independiente (Lima, 1921).Google Scholar

3 Klarén, Peter F., Modernization, Dislocation, and Aprismo: Origins of the Peruvian Apista Party, 1870–1932 (Austin, Texas, 1973), pp. 26–8.Google Scholar For a similar view, see del Castillo, Ernesto Yepes, Perú, 1820–1920 (Lima, 1972), pp. 209–13.Google Scholar

4 Klarén, Peter F., ‘The social and economic consequences of modernization in the Peruvian sugar industry, 1870–1930,’ in Duncan, Kenneth and Rutledge, Ian (eds.), Land and Labour in Latin America (Cambridge, 1977), p. 293.Google Scholar

5 Bauer, op. cit., p. 38.Google Scholar

6 Loveman, Brian, ‘Critique of Arnold J. Bauer's “Rural Workers in Spanish America: Problems of Peonage and Oppression,”’ Hispanic American Historical Review, No. 59 (08, 1979), pp. 478–86.Google Scholar Also see Bauer's reply in the same issue, pp. 486–90.Google Scholar

7 Gonzales, Michael Joseph, ‘Cayaltí: The Formation of a Rural Proletariat on a Peruvian Sugar Cane Plantation, 1875–1933’ (Ph.D. Diss., U.C., Berkeley, 1978), Chapters I and II.Google Scholar

8 See Appendix A.Google Scholar

9 Bowser, Frederick P., The African Slave in Colonial Peru, 1524–1650 (Stanford, 1974);Google ScholarStewart, Watt, Chinese Bondage in Peru (Durham, North Carolina, 1951);Google ScholarMeagher, Arnold J., ‘The Introduction of Chinese Laborers to Latin America: The “Coolie Trade,” 1847–1874’ (Ph.D. Diss., U.C., Davis, 1975).Google Scholar

10 Gonzales op. cit. Chapter III.Google Scholar

11 Horton, Susan Ramírez, ‘The Sugar Estates of the Lambayeque Valley, 1670–1800: A Contribution to Peruvian Agrarian History,’ (M.A. Thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1973), p. 14. The purchase date of Cayaltí is in the memorandum dated 12 February 1946, El Archivo del Fuero Agrario, Lima. For the size of Cayaltí, see Certificación de los titulos de la hacienda Cayaltí con sus anexos, 17 November 1920, El Archivo del Fuero Agrario.Google Scholar

12 Antero Aspíllaga Barrera to Ramón Aspíllaga Ferrebú, 14 June 1875, El Archivo del Fuero Agrario. The following abbreviations will be used throughout this article: Víctor Aspíllaga Taboada — V.A.T; Antero Aspíllaga Barrera — A.A.B; Baldomero Aspíllaga Barrera — B.A.B.; Ramón Aspíllaga Barrera — R.A.B.; Ramón Aspíllaga Ferrebú — R.A.F; Ismael Aspíllaga Barrera — I.A.B; Aspíllaga Hermanos (firm) — A.H.; El Archivo del Fuero Agrario — A.F.A.Google Scholar

13 A.H. to A.H., 9 June 1891, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 22 March 1892, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 12 Oct. 1889, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 15 Feb 1890, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 7 June 1893, A.F.A.Google Scholar

14 For a discussion of improving economic conditions in the 1890s, see Thorp, Rosemary and Bertram, Geoffrey, Peru 1890–1977 (New York, 1978).Google Scholar On increasing political stability and the emerging oligarchy, see Gilbert, Dennis, The Oligarchy and the Old Regime in Peru (Ithaca, N.Y., 1977). Antero Aspíllaga Barrera was one of the leading political figures of his day.Google Scholar

15 A.H. to A.H. 9 September 1879, A.F.A.Google Scholar

16 Gonzales, op. cit., pp. 218–22.Google Scholar

17 A.H. to A.H., 5 June 1889 (a), A.F.A.Google Scholar

18 Contratos de la Hacienda Pomalca, A.F.A.; and Horton, Douglas E., Haciendas and Co-operatives (Madison, Wisconsin, 1973), p. 18.Google Scholar

19 Klarén, Modernization, Dislocation, and Aprismo, Chapter II.Google Scholar

20 V.A.T. to A.H., 18 June 1907, A.F.A.Google Scholar

21 Bowser, op. cit.Google Scholar

22 Gonzales, op. cit., pp. 215–18;Google ScholarAlbert, Bill, An Essay on the Peruvian Sugar Industry, 1880–1920 (Norwich, 1976), pp. 103a–105a.Google Scholar

23 de Rivero, Francisco, Memoria o sean apuntamientos sobre la industria agricola del Perú y sobre algunos medios que pudieran adoptarse (Lima, 1845), pp. 21–2;Google Scholar[Elías, Domingo and Rodriguez, Juan], In migración de Chinos, ventajas que proporcionan al país (Lima, 1851), pp. 19–20. Both sources contain personal testimony by coastal sugar planters on this point.Google Scholar

24 Censo General de la República del Perú, Formado en 1876, Vol. V, Huanuco, Ica, Junin, Lambayeque, La Libertad (Lima, 1878). The only complete copy of the 2876 census is in the Biblioteca de la Oficina Nacional de Estadisticas y Censos, Lima.Google Scholar

25 Sarachaga, Juan, Ed. ‘Estadistica fisica y politica del Departamento de Cajamarca (1855),’ in Colección Fenix, Vol. 17, Biblioteca Nacional, Lima.Google Scholar

26 Puga, Pelayo, La jalta de brazos para la agricultura de la costa del Perú (Lima, 1903); Interviews conducted by John Gitlitz in Cajamarca during the 1970s. Gitlitz kindly shared this information with me during a conversation in Lima on 5 September 1974.Google Scholar

27 B.A.B. to A.H., 16 February 1892, A.F.A.Google Scholar

28 Memoria que presenta el Sub-Prefecto de la Provincia de Huamachuco á la Prefectura del Departamento, May 26, 1902. Biblioteca Nacional, Lima.Google Scholar

29 Gitlitz Interviews. ‘Los Hijos de Cutervo,’ Proyectada Provincia de Cutervo (Lima, 1904), in Colccción Fenix, Vol. XVII. Biblioteca Nacional, Lima.Google Scholar

30 B.A.B. to A.H., 16 February 1892, A.F.A.; Contract between Eduardo Tiravante and e Hacienda Pomalca, 20 June 1917, A.F.A.; Contract between Daniel Orrego and the Hacienda Pomalca, 26 January 1910, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 8 February 1906, A.F.A.; Informe sobre la Hacienda Chusgón, 23 April 1958, A.F.A.; Planillas of the Plantation Laredo, 1900–1908, A.F.A.Google Scholar

31 B.A.B. to A.H., 16 February 1892, A.F.A.Google Scholar

32 A. H. to A.H., 3 May 1897, A.F.A.Google Scholar

33 Bachmann, Carlos J., Departamento de Lambayeque (Lima, 1921), pp. 245–6;Google ScholarCole, George R. Fitz-Roy, The Peruvians at Home (London, 1884), pp. 136, 149. Both sources mention the Arbulu family as estate owners. Miguel Arbulu Gonzáles appears as a labour contractor in Contratos de la Hacienda Pomalca, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 24 June 1888, A.F.A.; Contracts between Eduardo Tiravante and the Hacienda Pomalca, 1 May 1912 and 20 June 1917, A.F.A.Google Scholar

34 N. Tello to A.H., 20 March 1899, A.F.A.; V.A.T. to A.H., 20 March 1920, A.F.A.; Miller, Solomon, ‘Hacienda to Plantation in Northern Peru: The Process of Proletarianization of a Tenant Farmer Society,’ in Vol. III, Contemporary Change in Traditional Society, Steward, Julian (ed.) (Urbana, Ill., 1967), pp. 169–70.Google Scholar

35 A.H. to A.H., 27 June 1889, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., July 31, 1889, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 11 October 1892, A.F.A.; Correspondence of the labour contractor Catalino Coronado, A.F.A.; Interview with Galindo Bravo, CAP Pucá, 27 June 1975. Bravo was originally contracted to work at Pucalá by Catalino Coronado. In 1975 he was a member of the Consejo de Administración, CAP Pucalá.Google Scholar

36 Contratos de la Hacienda Pomalca, A.F.A.Google Scholar

37 ibid.; Cayaltí Correspondence.

38 Tello, S. to A.H., 2 November 1919, A.F.A. In 1919 dollars, S/. 50,000=$24,000.Google Scholar

39 Contratos de enganche, Hda. Tumán, A.F.A.; Letter dated 19 June 1919, Cayaltí Correspondence, A.F.A.; Ulloa Sotomayor. In 2900 dollars, S/. 50=$24.25; S/. 10=$4.85; 40 centavos=$.825.Google Scholar

40 Contratos de la Hacienda Pomalca, A.F.A.; Various contracts in the Cayaltí Correspondence, A.F.A.Google Scholar

41 A.H. to A.H., 24 September 1878, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 30 September 1878, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 21 October 1878, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 14 October 1879, A.F.A.Google Scholar

42 Existencia de trabajadores…, 8 June 1882, A.F.A.; A.A.B. to A.H., 9 December 1884, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 12 February 1885, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 26 February 1885, A.F.A.Google Scholar

43 A.H. to A.H., 30 July 1886, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 29 March 1888, A.F.A.; A.A.B. to R.A.B. and I.A.B., 10 October 1888, A.F.A.Google Scholar

44 A.H. to A.H., 12 November 1886, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 31 July 1885, A.F.A.Google Scholar

45 A.H. to AR., 5 June 1889(a), A.F.A.; AH. to A.H., 22 June 1889, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 11 July 1889(a), A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 24 June 1888, A.F.A.Google Scholar

46 A.H. to A.H., 7 May 1890, A.F.A.Google Scholar

47 A.H. to A.H., 16 October 1885, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 23 September 1888, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 3 October 1889(a), A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 15 November 1889, A.F.A.; A.H. to AR., 16 November 1891, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 16 February 1892, A.F.A.Google Scholar

48 A.H. to A.H., 12 November 1890, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 19 January 1900, A.F.A.; B.A.B. to A.H., 13 February 1892, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 27 July 1892, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 24 September 1895, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 23 April 1895, A.F.A.Google Scholar

49 A.H. to A.H., 2 July 1897, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 24 January 1899, A.F.A.; A.H. to Los Contratistas, 20 March 1899, A.F.A.; N. Salcedo to A.H., 4 March 1902, A.F.A.; Negrete Hnos. to A.H., 21 February 1902, A.F.A.; B.A.B. to A.H., 4 February 1903, A.F.A.; S. Tello to B.A.B., 10 March 1903, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 4 June 1895, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 15 September 1897, A.F.A.; N. Salcedo to A.H., 5 May 1900, A.F.A.; B.AB. to A.H., 28 June 1902, A.F.A.; F. Pérez Céspedes to R.A.B., 18 August 1905, A.F.A. By 1905, virtually all Chinese workers had been replaced by Peruvians. The last mention of the Chinese at Cayaltí was in 1907 when thirty were expelled from the estate. See, V.A.T. to AR., 12 September 1907, A.F.A.Google Scholar

50 A.H. to A.H., 9 May 1899, A.F.A.Google Scholar

51 A.H. to A.H., 13 January 1900, A.F.A.Google Scholar

52 A.H. to A.H., 19 January 1900, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 29 March 1890, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 27 May 1902, A.F.A.Google Scholar

53 For example, see Bauer, op. cit.Google Scholar

54 In the late 1890s the government used enganche to build a road from Tarma into the Selva. See El Comercio, November 28a, December 5b, 11a, 18a, 1896; February 16a, March 23b, April 8b, June 14a, October 4b, 1897; May 14a, June 4b, 7b, July 14b, 1898. I am indebted to Peter Blanchard for this reference.Google Scholar

55 Gonzales, op. cit. Chapter VI.Google Scholar

56 Katz, Friedrich, ‘Labor Conditions on Haciendas in Porfirian Mexico: Some Trends and Tendencies,’ Hispanic American Historical Review, No. 54 (02 1974), pp. 15–23.Google Scholar

57 On the Chinese, see Gonzales, op. cit., Chapters V and VI.Google Scholar

58 A.H. to A.H., 14 October 1879, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H. 25 March 1891, A.F.A.; Francisco Pérez Céspedes to A.H., 5 April 1902, A.F.A.Google Scholar

59 Abarca, Felipe Yanes, ‘Sistema de enganche, Distrito de Sorochuco-Hacienda Cayaltí’ (B.S. Thesis, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, 1972).Google Scholar

60 A.H. to A.H. 2 July 1897, A.F.A.; V.A.T. to A.H., 28 August 1907, A.F.A.Google Scholar

61 A.H. to A.H., 15 November 1892, A.F.A. and below. In 1900 dollars, S/. 100=$48.50.Google Scholar

62 See Gonzales, op. cit. Chapters VI and VIII.Google Scholar

63 A.H. to A.H., 25 March 1891, A.F.A.Google Scholar

64 A.H. to A.H., 29 March 1898, A.F.A.; V.A.T. to A.H., 31 August 1908, A.F.A.; Francisco Pérez Céspedes to A.H., 9 March 1902, A.F.A.Google Scholar

65 S.E. Medina to A.A.B,, 5 August 1902, A.F.A.; Thomas Colston to A.H., 14 October 1901, A.F.A.Google Scholar

66 Gonzales, op. cit., Chapter VII.Google Scholar

67 Correspondence of Tumán and Cayaltí, A.F.A.Google Scholar

68 Correspondence of Catalino Coronado, A.F.A.; A.H. to A.H., 18 November 1887, A.F.A.; B.A.B. to A.H., 6 December 1902, A.F.A.; Negrete Hnos. to A.H., 12 June 1903, A.F.A.; V.A.T to A.H., 11 August 1908, A.F.A.; V.A.T. to A.H., 14 October 1908, A.F.A.; B.A.B. to A.H., 26 October 1908, A.F.A.Google Scholar

69 Negrete Hnos. to A.H., 12 June 1903, A.F.A.; S. Tello to A.H., 25 October 1905, A.F.A.; V.A.T. to A.H., 14 October 1908, A.F.A.; B.A.B. to A.H., 26 October 1908, A.F.A.Google Scholar

70 Negrete Hnos. to A.H., 12 June 1903, A.F.A.Google Scholar

71 Tello, N. to A.H., 29 November 1905, A.F.A. An example of the use of force to detain escapees is V.A.T. to A.H., 11 August 1908, A.F.A.Google Scholar

72 V.A.T. to A.H., 14 October 1908, A.F.A.Google Scholar

73 Gonzales, op. cit. pp. 56–62, 250.Google Scholar