Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T22:25:56.040Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sardars, Jobbers, Kanganies: The Labour Contractor and Indian Economic History*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 September 2008

TIRTHANKAR ROY
TIRTHANKAR ROY*
Affiliation:
Economic History Department, London School of Economics and Political Science
*
† E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A figure in part a foreman, in part a headman, and in part a recruiting contractor, formed an indispensable part of labour organization in mills, mines, ports and plantations in nineteenth-century India, and in the tropical colonies where Indian emigrants went for work. Historians have explained the presence of such a figure by the needs of capital for intermediaries, or needs of labour for familiar relationships in an unfamiliar environment. The significance of the labour agent for economic history, however, seems to go beyond these needs. The universal presence of a worker who embodied a variable blend of roles prompts several larger questions. Was the labour agent an institutional response to an economic problem? Were modern forms of agency rooted in older modes of labour organization? The scholarship discussed the gains for employers. Were there costs too? This paper is a preliminary attempt at framing these larger issues. I suggest here that the agent had roots in the traditional economy, and represented an incorporation of putting out and the authority of the headman inside modern work sites, and that this incorporation of traditional authority in a modern setting gave rise to contradictions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 42 , Issue 5 , September 2008 , pp. 971 - 998
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

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.)

Footnotes

*

An earlier version of the paper was presented in a panel titled ‘Colonialism and Labour’ at the 14th International Economic History Congress, Helsinki, August 2006. I thank participants at the panel for a useful discussion. A part of the research was carried out at the International Institute of Social History, Amsterdam, in June 2006, while I was on a fellowship funded by the Indo-Dutch Programme on Alternatives in Development.

References

1 Formally, indenture was a contract to serve for a fixed term, usually several years. Informally, because workers were often non-literate and ill-informed, the contract could resemble slavery. Historical scholarship debates its resemblance to slavery.

2 The expression is used in Chakravarty, Lalita, ‘Emergence of an industrial labour force in a dual economy – British India, 1880–1920’, Indian Economic and Social History Review, Vol. 15 (1978), pp. 249–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Morris, M.D., The Emergence of an Industrial Labor Force in India (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1965), pp. 129–142Google Scholar; Morris, M.D., ‘The recruitment of an industrial labor force in India, with British and American comparisons’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 2 (1960), pp. 305–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kooiman, D., Bombay Textile Labour: Managers, Trade Unionists and Officials (Delhi: Manohar, 1989), pp. 21–28Google Scholar; Mazumdar, D., ‘Labour supply in early industrialization: The case of the Bombay textile industry’, Economic History Review, Vol. 26 (1973), pp. 477–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Chakrabarty, D., Rethinking Working-Class History: Bengal, 1890–1940 (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1989), pp. 109–14Google Scholar; Chandavarkar, R.N., The Origins of Industrial Capitalism in India: Business Strategies and Working Classes in Bombay, 1900–1940 (Cambridge, 1994), pp. 195–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Balachandran, G., ‘Searching for the sardar: The state, pre-capitalist institutions and human agency in the maritime labour market, Calcutta 1880–1935’ in Stein, Burton and Subramanyam, Sanjay, eds., Institutions and Economic Change in South Asia (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1996)Google Scholar; Carter, M., Servants, Sirdars and Settlers: Indians in Mauritius (London and New York: Oxford University Press, 1995)Google Scholar.

4 Morris, Emergence of an Industrial Labor Force.

5 Chandavarkar, The Origins of Industrial Capitalism.

6 Mazumdar, ‘Labour supply in early industrialization’.

7 Balachandran, in ‘Searching for the Sardar’, correctly notes that there is circularity in culturalist explanations: the agent can be seen as both a cause and an effect of a cultural distance.

8 Rethinking Working-Class History, p. 112.

9 Batliwala, S.K., ‘Problems of the Indian mill industry’, The Indian Textile Journal 1890–1940 (Bombay, 1940), p. 27Google Scholar.

10 ‘Why isn't the whole world developed? Lessons from the cotton mills’, Journal of Economic History, Vol. 47 (1987), pp. 141–173; Clark, G. and Feenstra, R.C., ‘Technology in the great divergence’, in Bordo, M., Taylor, A.M., Williamson, J.G. (eds.), Globalization in Historical Perspective (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2001), pp. 277–322Google Scholar.

11 Wolcott, Susan, ‘Perils of lifetime employment systems: Productivity advance in the Indian and Japanese textile industries, 1920–1938’, Journal of Economic History, Vol. 54 (1994), pp. 307–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wolcott, Susan and Clark, Gregory, ‘Why nations fail: Managerial decisions and performance in Indian cotton textiles, 1890–1938’, Journal of Economic History, Vol. 59 (1999), pp. 397–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar; for a critique and a different view on the question of effort, see Gupta, Bishnupriya, Work and Efficiency in Cotton Mills: Did the Indian Entrepreneur Fail? (University of Warwick, 2003)Google Scholar.

12 Chandavarkar, R.N., ‘Industrialization in India before 1947: Conventional approaches and alternative perspectives’, Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 19 (1985), pp. 623–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 J.-L. Liège, ‘Indentured labour in the Indian ocean and the particular case of Mauritius’, in Intercontinenta No. 5 (Leiden, 1986), p. 15.

14 An important example is the oyakata in early Japanese factories, see Taira, Koji, ‘Factory labour and the industrial revolution in Japan’, in Yamamura, K. (ed.), The Economic Emergence of Modern Japan (Cambridge, 1997), pp. 239–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Smith, S.A., ‘Workers and supervisors: St Petersburg 1905–1917 and Shanghai 1895–1927’, Past and Present, Vol. 139 (1993), pp. 131–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Cloud, P. and Galenson, D.W., ‘Chinese immigration and contract labor in the late nineteenth century’, Explorations in Economic History, Vol. 24 (1987), pp. 22–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15 Leff, N.H., ‘Industrial organization and entrepreneurship in the developing countries: The economic groups’, Economic Development and Cultural Change, Vol. 26 (1978), pp. 661–675CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Yamamura, Kozo, ‘Entreprenuership, ownership, and management in Japan’, in Yamamura, , ed., The Economic Emergence of Modern Japan (Cambridge, 1997), pp. 294–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 For an early review of the definition and the literature, see Bardhan, P.K., ‘Interlocking factor markets and agrarian development: A review of issues’, Oxford Economic Papers, Vol. 32 (1980), pp. 82–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 Taira, ‘Factory labour’, p. 284.

18 India, Correspondence Relative to the Introduction of Indian Labourers Into the Mauritius (London, 1842), p. 9.

19 India, Report of the Indian Irrigation Commission 1901–1903, Part-II – Provincial (London, 1903), p. 175.

20 Ceylon Labour Commission in 1908, cited in India, Report of the Committee on Emigration From India to the Crown Colonies and Protectorates (London, 1910), p. 27.

21 India, Proceedings of the Assam Labour Enquiry Committee in the Recruiting and Labour Districts, Vol. I (Evidence) (Calcutta, 1906), p. 107, T.H. Hill, Protector of Labour, Federated Malay States.

22 For example, Jain, R.K., ‘South Indian labour in Malaya 1840–1920: Asylum stability and involution’ in Saunders, Kay (ed.), Indentured Labour in the British Empire 1834–1920 (London and Canberra, 1984), pp. 158–182Google Scholar, on Malaya. For recent works on the kangany, see P.E. Baak, ‘About enslaved ex-slaves, uncaptured contract coolies and unfreed freedmen: Some Notes about ‘free’ and ‘unfree’ labour in the context of plantation development in southwest India, early sixteenth century-mid 1990s’, Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 33 (1999), 121–157; and Wenzlhuemer, R., ‘Indian labour immigration and British labour policy in nineteenth-century Ceylon’, Modern Asian Studies, Vol. 41 (2007), pp. 575–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 India, Exportation of Hill Coolies (Calcutta, 1841), p. 152, J.D. Bourdillon, Joint Magistrate, Arcot.

24 As in the case with which David Northrup begins his book, see, Indentured Labor in the Age of Imperialism 1834–1922 (Cambridge, 1995), p. 1.

25 House of Commons, Copies of Government of India Despatch, dated 22 June 1889, with its enclosures, including reports by Mr. Tucker and, of Memorial of the Indian Association of Calcutta, dated 12 April 1888 (in continuation of House of Lords' Return (No. 14), 5 March 1889 (London, 1888–89), p. 36.

26 Lal, B.V., ‘Labouring men and nothing more: Some problems of Indian indenture in Fiji’, in Saunders, Kay (ed.), Indentured Labour in the British Empire 1834–1920 (London and Canberra: Croom Helm, 1984), pp. 126–157Google Scholar.

27 Houbert, J., ‘Mauritius: Independence and dependence’, Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 19 (1981), pp. 75–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

28 Servants, Sirdars and Settlers.

29 India, Report of the Committee on Emigration, p. 19.

30 Ibid.

31 Lai, Walton Look, Indentured Labor, Caribbean Sugar: Chinese and Indian Migrants to the British West Indies 1838–1918 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993), pp. 112–115Google Scholar.

32 India, Proceedings of the Assam Labour Enquiry Committee in the Recruiting and Labour Districts, Vol. I (Evidence) (Calcutta, 1906), p. ix.

33 Griffiths, Percival, The History of the Indian Tea Industry (London: Weidenfield and Nicholson, 1967), pp. 633–634Google Scholar. In this case, the transportation problem was solved by a combination of railway, steamboats and bullock carts, and not railway alone.

34 The best general account of the agent in the tea gardens is Griffiths, History of the Indian Tea Industry, pp. 267–296.

35 ‘[A] common story [in Jubbulpore] ]is that oil is extracted from the bodies of coolies’, India, Assam Labour Enquiry, p. 57.

36 According to one professional agent, ‘most of the people free recruited under the present system have been phuslaoed [tricked] by the recruiters’, India, Assam Labour Enquiry, p. 5.

37 A European Magistrate of Ranchi remarked that ‘the recruiters keep up connection with local badmashes [miscreants]’.37 As one contractor explained, ‘if I tell the ways [of enticing a coolie without inviting the Magistrate's suspicion], I may suffer in consequences’. Ibid., p. 8.

38 Ibid., p. 10.

39 Das, R.K., Plantation Labour in India (Calcutta: R. Chatterji, 1931), pp. 70–90Google Scholar.

40 ‘Absenteeism’, usually a result of some workers leaving for their villages without taking leave, was the principal example cited by the millowners to show that the quality of labour was inadequate. The reliance on the jobber rested on this feature. What is not clear, however, is whether absenteeism was the cause or the effect of the dependence on the agent.

41 India, Assam Labour Enquiry, p. 238.

42 ‘The Dooars are more popular than Assam because people can come back when they like’, E.M. Whitley, S.P.G. Mission, Ranchi, before India, Assam Labour Enquiry, p. 13.

43 Ibid., p. 5.

44 For one example, India, Assam Labour Enquiry, p. 4. On women's migration to Assam, see also Sen, S., ‘“Without his consent?”: Marriage and women's migration in colonial India’, International Labor and Working-Class History, Vol. 65 (2004), pp. 77–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

45 India, Assam Labour Enquiry, pp. 23–24.

46 Ibid. p. 77.

47 India, Assam Labour Enquiry, p. 171, A.B. Hawkins, Assam Oil Company.

48 India, Assam Labour Enquiry, pp. 46, 50.

49 Griffiths, History of the Indian Tea Industry, pp. 280.

50 Ibid., p. 46.

51 Ibid., p. 52.

52 India, Assam Labour Enquiry, p. 41.

53 India, Assam Labour Enquiry, p. 151, E.W Pickard-Cambridge, planter.

54 India, Royal Commission on Labour in India, Vol. VI, Part II, Evidence recorded in Assam (Calcutta, 1931), p. 103, J.H. Copeland, Manager, Cinnamara Tea Estate.

55 Jha, J.C., Aspects of Indentured Inland Emigration to North-East India 1859–1918 (Delhi: Indus, 1996), p. 27Google Scholar.

56 India, Royal Commission on Labour, Vol. VI, Part II, pp. 114–118, workers at Boloma Tea Estate.

57 India, Royal Commission on Labour, Vol. VI, Part II, p. 113, C.K. Bezbaruah, Manager, Boloma Tea Estate.

58 Chandavarkar, ‘Industrialization in India before 1947’. See also Chandavarkar, Origins of Industrial Capitalism.

59 Morris, Emergence of an Industrial Labor Force, pp. 129–153.

60 ‘A Retired Mill Manager’, ‘Hints on the management of cotton mills’, Indian Textile Journal, Vol. 14 (1903), p. 81.

61 India, Royal Commission on Labour in India, Vol. I, Part I, Written Evidence Recorded in Bombay Presidency (Calcutta, 1931), p. 296, Bombay Textile Labour Union.

62 Chandavarkar, Origins of Industrial Capitalism, p. 196.

63 Morris, Emergence of an Industrial Labor Force, p. 136.

64 India, Royal Commission on Labour in India, Vol. I, Part II, Oral Evidence Recorded in Bombay Presidency (Calcutta, 1931), p. 431.

65 ‘A.: If a jobber moves from a mill he will take the labour with him. . . . Q.: Does he take the labour with him because of their affection for him or because of bonds of other kinds? A.: Bonds of other kinds . . . there is no affection about it’. Evidence by R. Blackwell, J. Parker, J.B. Green, Bombay European Textile Association, India, Royal Commission on Labour in India, Vol. I, Part II, p. 332.

66 Roy, T., Traditional Industry in the Economy of Colonial India (Cambridge, 1999), chap. 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

67 India, Indian Factory Labour Commission, Vol. II, Evidence (Simla, 1908), p. 111.

68 ‘A Retired Mill Manager, ‘Hints on the management’, p. 81.

69 Chandavarkar, Origins of Industrial Capitalism.