It is somewhat ironic that the British needed to import labor into their African colonies, considering that for centuries prior Africa had been the supplier of surplus labor around the world. Still, however, the British needed a large workforce to develop infrastructure in the East African colonial holdings of Natal, Uganda, and Kenya. To meet this demand, the English turned to their largest colony, both in terms of wealth and population, India. The use of South Asian labor was not without precedent, though. The British had already seen, with satisfaction, the efficiency of Indian labor on several penal colonies, such as Ceylon, the Andaman Islands, and Burma.

The most successful among these penal colonies, though, and the one that eventually convinced the British to use Indians in Africa, was the island of Mauritius. Originally unsettled, the Dutch first attempted colonization of this small island east of Madagascar, only to abandon the island to French control in 1710, who in turn would be expelled from the island by the British a century after. (Anderson 1) Between 1814 and 1837, the British sent over thousands of Indians to serve out prison terms laboring mostly on the island’s sugar plantations or on building roads and bridges. In addition to the convicts sent over, many more free South Asians went to Mauritius as either indentured servants or as entrepreneurs. The new arrivals transformed the once unpopulated island into a thriving agricultural enterprise and major Indian Ocean trading port.

Although criminals had been first shipped in 1814, it was not until May of two years later that the British Empire established Mauritius as an official penal colony. (Anderson 14) The two arriving ships, both carrying 150 convicts, had left India in September of 1815. Afterward, however, the number of transported Indians per ship was reduced to forty. The reason for that number was that it was believed that the ship’s crew was adequately equipped to handle forty convicts in the event of an uprising, while a larger number indeed might successfully overtake the ship. (Anderson 14) During the passage to Mauritius, the low number of convicts sent per ship had a beneficial effect in that the mortality rate on board the transfer ships remained below 3 percent, as compared to a death rate of 7- 9 percent on the island. (Anderson 23)

In some cases, prisoners actually preferred to be sent to labor in Mauritius instead of being sent to prison. Criminals were given prison terms of fewer years if sent to the colony instead of a prison house, and also may have been attracted to the idea that, while they would be involved in state mandated labor, they would not be subject to prison conditions in India. By 1820, a growing number of convicted felons actually requested transportation to Mauritius rather than prison incarceration. (Anderson 18) Those who were selected for transfer to the penal colony were given terms of transportation of 7, 10, or 14 years, or life in cases of serious offenses. (Anderson 29)

As for the ethnic makeup of those transported, the British were not as indifferent about who was sent as they were not eclectic. From Bengal, the largest single group, accounting for just over one- third of all transported convicts, were Muslims, while shudras made up just under one- third, and most of those remaining were either from the dalit or adivasi caste. From Bombay presidency, the latter two represented nearly three- fourths of all transportees. (Anderson 18) In
addition, throughout the over twenty years of transportation, only six female convicts were sent- one from Bengal, one from Ceylon, and four from Bombay. (Anderson 19)

The nature of the work on the island was labor intensive, but there were benefits to those who proved good and dedicated workers. On the island, both criminals and indentured servants who arrived were assigned to work days of 9- 10 hours per day. For laborers who performed their tasks well, the specific work that person did may be lessened, or that person given an easier crop or better land, or may even be promoted to a managerial or supervisory position, while those who refused to work, or were uncooperative, would be punished with more intensive labor and even longer hours. (Anderson 34) In addition, flogging was also used as a punitive measure. The convict was also singled out by a marking to distinguish him from a non- criminal worker, although the difference in status was not necessarily better. Convicts and indentured servants were kept together on the plantations. In addition, some of the British plantation owners and wealthy residents and also some of the remaining French settlers on the island owned slaves, and so the marking of convicts served only not to confuse a criminal with a slave, another forced laborer. (Anderson 35) Those not employed on plantations built roads and bridges, dug canals, and rebuilt the island’s capital, Port Louis, destroyed by fire in 1816. Rations were given to the laborers every ten days, and included rice, lentils, ghee, fish, salt, and wood, along with one new set of clothes every year, although workers were also permitted to raise small animals for consumption. (Anderson 41)

Most indentured servants arrived after 1837, when the import on convicts ceased. More and more indentured servants were sought, as the convicts were now being gradually emancipated through acts of the government. As their terms expired and they remained on the island as free hired labor, the number of convicts on Mauritius dwindled, dropping from 611 in 1830 to 382 in 1846. (Anderson 111) It is key to note that the convicts remained on as free labor because in 1853, when the government officially freed all remaining convicts, it did so on the condition that the convicts did not return to India. (Anderson 118) Two key acts were passed between 1837 and that helped speed up emancipation. One was the granting of the power to pardon to the Governor of Mauritius, Lionel Smith in 1841. (Anderson 113) The other was the 1849 act freeing any convict laborer who was either over the age of 65 or had worked on the island for 30 years or more, freeing a large portion of the remaining convict labor force. (Anderson 116) Smith had several times proposed general manumission, but had been rejected by the government, since some of the convicts had been uncooperative and had committed more crimes on the island, or had served in the 1816 mutiny of 230 convicts.

Seeing the relative success of the use of Indian labor on Mauritius, the Great Britain decided to import South Asians to some of its other African holdings, the largest of whom being Natal, in present day South Africa. The first arrivals in Natal came in the early 1860’s, a significant date because that would make it shortly after the failed Sepoy Mutiny of 1857- 1858. In these years, the British exercised harsh policies and many Indians found themselves unable to find employment at home, and so South Africa began to appear attractive. India began to look attractive to white plantation owners who found the indigenous black population of Africa uncooperative, even as paid labor. (Henning 7)

It was in 1859 that the first steps were taken to set up a new kind of labor transport. Natal was to be a colony of indentured Indians and black natives, both working for white settlers. The Natal Immigration Laws were set up in 1859, among them Law 14, giving the government the right to transfer an indentured servant from one master to another, and setting up guidelines for recruitment. (Henning 9) In November of 1860, the first two ships left for Natal, the Belvedere and the Truro, each carrying 342 indentured servants. (Henning 30) In these initial voyages, there was a high percentage of women passengers, as females accounted for one- third of the passengers on the Truro, and one- fourth that of the Belvedere. (Henning 32)

Advertisements for indentured laborers offered 9 hours of work per day, 6 days per week, with monthly payment of 10 shillings to adult males and half that amount to women and children, with gradual increases of 1 shilling as the time of service played out. (Swan 188) These, along with other provisions such as decent living conditions, were the terms of the contract, though they were not met. Agricultural indentured servants worked sometimes as many as 18 hours per day, and were huddled into unventilated and unheated rooms, along with an inconsistent and insufficient food ration. (Swan 121) Masters also set up a system of deductions to withhold pay from the servants based on illness or unsatisfactory output, even though there were laws clearly stating that an indentured servant’s salary was guaranteed under all conditions except when stopped by, and only by, the Magistrate’s Court, although this avenue was seldom taken. (Henning 43)

A Protector of Indian Immigration was installed in 1859 under the Natal Immigration Laws for the indentured servants and free immigrants who came to Natal to address grievances to, and this individual indeed was given a swarm of petitions because many Indians felt they were not receiving fair treatment under the terms of their contract. The community in the city of Durban wrote in 1877 that, “It is painful and disheartening to us Indians after inviting us into this colony and thus treated as slaves instead of free- born subjects.” (Muslim 6)

Conditions were slow to improve. As more and more South Asians arrived in South Africa every year, there was a growing concern among the white settlers to curb their potential influence. A slew of restrictions were placed on the Asian minority that crippled their legal status and sought to marginalize them as much as the black population. In 1883, the viceroy was petitioned to lift a 9 P.M. curfew for Asians, along with government protection of temples, legislation requiring the rations of indentured laborers to be raised, and the provision of a South Asian jury to decide cases where the perpetrator was an Indian. (D. Pillay 10) An 1884 letter to the Protector of Indian Immigration complained of no attempt to search for missing children who were suspected of being kidnapped for use of forced labor on railways or in mines, along with accounts of routine beatings of indentured servants, certainly conditions that were not bargained for in the contract of servitude. (Bhagoo 5) The greatest strike to the indentured servants, and the growing Asian community in South Africa, came in 1894, when the colonial government passed the Immigration Law Amendment Bill, stating that when an indentured laborer’s period of servitude was over, he must return to India or enter into an extension of the term, in addition to the new annual tax of three pounds placed on all free Asians living in Africa. (Bill 53)

Originally, the indentured persons were intended for work on plantations, though the British soon afterward found huge labor shortages in some of the other African colonial industries. Though signed up for agricultural work, many Indians, upon arrival in Natal, found themselves instead put to work on railroad construction and in mining, since these were more profitable enterprises. Conditions in these sectors was even worse, since miners were given little or no equipment to preserve health, and rail workers were given still fewer rations along with being exposed to a host of foreign diseases. Since a growing number of indentured servants wrote home in complaint, some companies looking to recruit more Indians attempted to include some mining duties in all contracts, though this attempt was blocked by the government. (Swan 124)

The status of the free Indian was only slightly better in that he was not bound to any one particular master. However, the government was highly restrictive of this class, and much fearful as well. The indentured servants could be expected to return to India after their contract had expired. The immigrant, though, was in South Africa to begin a new life, and thousands of them arrived each year. In 1885, the Group Areas Act arose, intending to set up reserves for Indians to keep them out of white areas, and make Asians a self- contained community in poorly sanitized and outlying areas. (B. Pillay 5) There was also Law 3 that, in addition to also restricting places of residence, also imposed registration fees on Asians, while denying them both citizenship and property rights. (B. Pillay 11) The government argued that the removal of Indians “was required on sanitary grounds,” since Asians naturally carried a plethora of diseases that may affect whites, but now would grant property rights in those designated areas, along with reducing registration fees. (B. Pillay 17)

Other restrictions included a tax raise in 1890 that effectively cut Indian immigration, forced many Asian merchants to close their shops, and placed huge fees on farming and polls. (B. Pillay 33) In the Transvaal, legislation was put in place by the Executive Council in 1902 restricting Indians from buying speculative land, leaving that opportunity for the Boers who were not restricted in any way from obtaining land and accumulating wealth. (B. Pillay100) Morality Law 2, passed in 1897, prevented both blacks and Asians from having relations with white women. (B. Pillay 63) In 1899, Gandhi wrote in protest of a newly proposed law that wished to expel Indians from Johannesburg, arguing that the removal would cost Indian merchants dearly if their shops would have to be closed and relocated. (Gandhi 46)

Despite the heavy and escalating restrictions, the Indian minority did benefit from having the Wragg Commission set up in 1885. This group was established to decide what should be done with the exploding immigration population. The Wragg Commission found that the Indians were given inadequate hospital facilities and had a high incidence of venereal diseases. Among its recommendations were the establishment of cemeteries for Indians to improve sanitary conditions, for prisons to have a medical examiner in order to curb the horrible outbursts of disease that lead to a high prison mortality rate, and the registration of marriages. (Henning 69)

With immigrants arriving by the thousands each year, the Indian population surpassed that of white settlers in South Africa in 1894, leading the government to look for serious measures to stop entry of Asians into the colony outright. One measure taken was that the legislature required that all indentured Indians must return to India upon completion, with the guarantee of repatriation by the Government of India. (Henning 95) Whites began to fight for the removal of all Indians, and Indians fought for their right to stay. In 1897, when two ships arrived at Durban carrying immigrants, the two ships were sent back and their passengers not given entry into South Africa. A group of five thousand Indian protestors gathered to protest and force the government to allow the immigrants in. Rioting ensued. In response, the government passed the Immigrant Restriction Bill, blurring the difference between the indentured servant and the free Indian laborer by reducing the status of the former, and placing more restrictions on movement and taking away rights, making the bill a clear message from white settlers that Indians, regardless of function, were no longer welcome in South Africa. (Henning 136)

Indian labor was not confined to South Africa, either. Another potentially lucrative holding was the Ugandan Protectorate and its abutting neighbor, Kenya. These colonies established at the close of the nineteenth century, with Kenya formally annexed in 1920. An interior colony centered around Lake Victoria, extensive roads and railways, the major one set to link Mombasa with Kisumu, were needed to penetrate into Uganda, and indeed to open the interior of the Dark Continent. (Ramchandani 19) The British hoped that, upon completion, the rails would give Britain an edge to win domain over more African land, and the use of Indians on this new infrastructure might open up new colonies. (Mangat 28)

Indian labor began to be imported, although unlike the case in Natal, these Asians were being specifically recruited for industrial labor. A large number, though, were also brought in as agricultural servants. Another reason for the import of Indians was that India provided the British with a huge labor force to tap into, allowing them to develop their East African colonies faster than their imperial competitors. “The resources of her empire in India gave Britain an initial advantage in Kenya and Uganda such as Germany lacked in Tanganyika.” (Mangat 28) In Uganda, Asians were used primarily in the industrial sector, while in Kenya there was a large number of free immigrants who set up businesses in Nairobi. In either case, the British were both pleased and upset about the Indian presence. The colonial government was not resorting to working with the indigenous peoples, but were still operating with an inferior class. “By nature of the administrative and economic roles the colonial government had permitted the Indian and Pakistani immigrants, the capacity of the Asian to hurt the African was limited. Moreover, having himself suffered from British colonial rule, the Asian had a natural affinity with the African.” (Prem 22)

The first step towards the import of South Asians to east Africa came with the 1888 Royal charter for the Imperial British East Africa Company, purposely set up to plan out Indian work for expansion into the African interior. (Mangat 28) The first arrivals to work on the railways in Uganda came in 1896, only three years after the establishment of the protectorate. The bulk of the recruitment was done in Bombay and other areas of Northern India, until an outbreak of plague in 1897 caused the British to cease importing from there and begin attracting migrant laborers from Calcutta. (Mangat 36) Not all those who were brought over and given passage was an indentured servant. A number of different functions awaited South Asians in these colonies. Some Sikhs were hired as a protective measure for the rail workers in the thickly vegetated regions, while a number of other Indians served as a police force in port towns, while entire crews of skilled artisan labor were brought in to work on the railroads as masons and smiths. (Rai 15)

Similar to Natal, conditions of the contracts for the indentured servants were not met. In 1896, not the servants themselves but the Government of India made several demands for improved quality of life and working conditions for the laborers, among them demands for a reduction in the terms of service, establishment of a minimum wage, and more detailed accounts of the specific nature of the work to be done in Uganda. (Mangat 34) laborers On the rail lines also were subject to severe food shortages since supply lines were not so easily run as for agricultural servants. Salaries for the indentured servants was 55- 65 rs per month for the blacksmiths and masons, while those who cleared the way or laid track were given 20 rs permonth.

Some Indian servants were promoted to higher positions where they would supervise the work of other servants rather than work themselves. All Indians, though, eventually had to answer to a white officer, though it should be noted that the British officers placed in command of the laying of railroads had all first spent a number of years of service in India. (Rai 19) The average term of servitude was three years, and 32, 000 indentured servants arrived between1896 and 1901. (Mangat 37) Under terms of a settlement in March of 1897, indentured servants were required to work 9 hours a day 6 days out of the week, under penalty by fine or even termination of contract for infractions, but added a stipulation that for performance over the allotted quota, or extra hours put in, an additional bonus would be added to the pay. (Rai 21) Another benefit that was included by the Government of India was that upon completion of the term, the indentured servant would be provided with free passage back to India, though the return passage was not a pleasant one, as return ships were heavily overcrowded, had poor sanitary conditions, and were in decay, leading to a very high mortality rate, and of those who did survive the return passage, many had been permanently affected by the contraction of a disease while on board. (Rai 25)

Earlier, the British did not frown upon Indian immigration into their East African colonies.However, after the decision that Kenya was to become a settler colony, there became a growing urgency to cut the flow of non- whites into the region. Under the Emigration Act of 1883, many free Indian merchants, mostly from Gujarat, came and opened shops, enjoying a more or less equal status with the initial white settlers. (Mangat 51) There was a brief period where immigration dwindled, but was renewed in 1906, and by 1920, when Kenya was formally annexed, the growing white population was adamant about limiting the South Asian presence, and reducing the status of those already there. In Uganda, measures taken to check Indian influence included both placing trade restrictions on merchants and even the removal of Indian residents to reserved living areas. (Mangat 112) There was a huge concern that Indians would gobble up much of the good land and, if their businesses proved prosperous enough, and some had because many merchants had by that time began expanding and opening stores in other parts of the colony, that the Asian minority, though believed to be inherently inferior to the British, would nonetheless have a more prominent role in the administration of Kenya and Uganda because of their wealth. (Mangat 100)

The legacy of Indian importation and immigration to Africa remained on shaky ground.Many Africans remained indignant of the Asian communities, for though they also were repressed,they were given better treatment than blacks, and did have more economic opportunity, opportunities many Indians took advantage of. The result was that as more blacks became involved with government, there was an increasing movement to stifle their rights, such that after independence, Indians were now the target of repressive black governments rather than repressive white governments. Uganda went so far as to expel its Asian population. To this day though, Asians remain a sizable minority in many African nations. It should be noted, though, that while they constitute an African people, they were not always welcome. The Wragg Commission declared that if the indentured servant did not return to India after his contract expired, than “his status should be reduced.” (Henning 75) Harry Escombe, a prominent white politician said, ‘The Indians are to come here appreciated as laborers, but not welcomed as settlers or competitors.’ (Henning 95) The sentiment was reiterated in other colonies. Indeed, “the one central theme running through all stages of Indian emigration was that Indians were needed as ‘indentured laborers but not as freemen.’” (Rai 13)

WORKS CITED

Anderson, Clare. Convicts in the Indian Ocean: Transportation from South Asia to Mauritius, 1815-1853. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2000.

Gandhi, Mohandas. “Letter Written by Gandhi 21 July 1899” in A Documentary History of Indian SouthAfricans. ed. Surendra Bhana and Bridglal Pachai. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press, 1984.

Henning, CG. The Indentured Indian in Natal. New Delhi: Promilla and Co. Publishers, 1993.

Immigration Law Ammendment Bill, 1894 in A Documentary History of Indian South Africans. ed. Surendra Bhana and Bridglal Pachai. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press, 1984.

Mangat, J.S.. A History of the Asians in East Africa 1886-1945. London: Oxford University Press, 1969.

Natal Archives, I.I/1/18,189/1884 “Bhagoo, an Indentured Servant to J. Meikle” in A Documentary Historyof Indian South Africans. ed. Surendra Bhana and Bridglal Pachai. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press, 1984.

Natal Archives, I.I./1/3,105/1877 “Muslim Group in Durban” in A Documentary History of Indian SouthAfricans. ed. Surendra Bhana and Bridglal Pachai. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press, 1984.

Natal Archives, G.H.318, 1883-1886 “Petition to Viceroy by Doorasamy Pillay” in A Documentary History of Indian South Africans. ed. Surendra Bhana and Bridglal Pachai. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press, 1984.

North-Coombes, MD. “Indentured Labor in the Sugar Industries of Natal and Mauritius” in Essays onIndentured Indians in Natal. ed. Surendra Bhana. Yorkshire: Peepal Tree Press, 1990.

Pillay, Bala. British Indians in the Transvaal: Trade, Politics, and Imperial Relations 1885-1906.London: Longman Group Ltd., 1976.

Prem, Bhatia. Indian Ordeal in Africa. Delhi: Vikas Publishing House Pvt. Ltd., 1973.

Rai, Kauleshwar. Indians and British Colonialism in East Africa 1883-1939. Patna: Associated Book Agency, 1979.

Ramchandani, RR. Uganda Asians: The End of an Enterprise. Bombay: United Asia Publications, 1976.

Swan, Maureen. “Indentured Indians: Accommodation and Resistance, 1890-1913” in Essays onIndentured Indians in Natal. ed. Surendra Bhana. Yorkshire: Peepal Tree Press, 1990.

The Use of Indian Labor in British Africa

Frank Cavitolo
History 63