{"id":21,"date":"2018-07-22T10:20:40","date_gmt":"2018-07-22T10:20:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/socp11.epgpbooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/?post_type=chapter&p=21"},"modified":"2022-01-06T12:00:51","modified_gmt":"2022-01-06T12:00:51","slug":"colonial-period-indenture-kangani-andmaistry-systems","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/socp11\/chapter\/colonial-period-indenture-kangani-andmaistry-systems\/","title":{"rendered":"Colonial Period: Indenture, Kangani andMaistry systems"},"content":{"raw":"
\r\n\r\n1. INTRODUCTION<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n

After the onset of the industrial revolution in England, British colonial capital expanded around the globe. At the same time there was a huge demand for unskilled labourers for the development and expansion of plantation economies in the British colonies, mainly in the sugar producing colonies and tea and rubber plantation colonies. But \u201cafter the passing of the Act of Abolition (1833) by the British government, slavery [a source of cheap labour] was banned throughout the British Empire\u201d (MEA 2001: 76) The sugar planters put acute pressure on the British government to combat the depressed sugar industry market, that went into a temporary decline after the withdrawal of slavery, a source of labour. Britain decided to recruit and export a large amount of Indian indentured labourersto the sugar producing colonies across the globe(National Archives 2007: p. 2).<\/p>\r\n \r\n

India as a colony of British Empire, a \u2018jewel in the crown\u2019 became an ideal target for outsourcing cheaplabour as it had reserves of population who lived in poor socio- economic conditions. Further, they were burdened with unjustified taxes under the colonial regime.Therefore land holding peasants were turned to rootless labourers and eventually forced to work in factories and onto plantations through the world. To meet the ever increasing demand for labour, innovative recruitment schemes were devised by the British colonial regime, namely: the indenture, Kangani<\/em>andMaistry<\/em>systems(See Kuper 1960: 2).These schemes were designed to transfer unskilled labourersfrom India to the British coloniesinteralia<\/em>in South Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia, the focus areas of this e-module. It\u00a0was against this background that Indians began contracting their labour from about 1834 to the plantations of the world until the indenture, <\/span>Kangani<\/em> and <\/span>Maistry<\/em> systems were abolished (See Reddy 2007: 1).<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n1.1.Definition, Origins and Terms of Indenture<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n

Defining indenture<\/em>: The concept of \u2018indenture\u2019 amounts to an individual being bound to work according to a prescribed contract. It refers to the \u201ctransfer of labour power from metropoles to colonies\u201d or as a\u201c system of bonded labour with a resemblance to slavery\u201d (Harris 2010: 147).<\/p>\r\n \r\n

The indenture system commenced in 1834 to outsource Indian labourers to Mauritius, Uganda and Nigeria. Later, it was expanded to other countries: Guyana(1838), New Zealand(1840), Hong Kong (1841), Trinidad and Tobago and Malaya (1844), Martinique and Guadeloupe(1854),Grenada(1856), St.Lucia(1858) and St.VincentandNatal(1860) (Lal et al 2007). The colonial Government in India passed Act No. XXXIII of 1860 which extended the provision of Act No.21 of 1855 to include the Colony of Natal (Francis 1983: p.4).Immigration agencies were set up at the port cities ofBombay, Madras, and Calcutta, for the recruitment of Indian labourers. At each of the recruitment agencies, there was a government official- the \u2018Protector of Emigrants\u2019 to ensure that no coercion was used on the emigrant and that the emigrant understood about the five-year contract he was making. In Natal, the Act 14 of 1859 provided for the appointment of a \u2018Coolie Immigration Agent\u2019, in charge of the Coolie Immigration Department (Ibid: 5-6). Later the recruitment system was extended to St.Kitts (1861), Japan and Surinam (1872), Jamaica (1873), Fiji (1879), Burma(1885), Canada(1904) and Thailand(1910)(Clarkeet al. 1990).<\/p>\r\n \r\n

The indentured labourers were popularly known as \u2018girmityas<\/em>\u2019 (a colloquial expression for \u2018those who signed the agreement\u2019)(For details see Lal1997).The essential feature of the indenturelabour scheme was that it was contractual in nature. Under this scheme, workers could be contracted for a period of five years. This modality ensured a steady flow of labourers to the plantations in the British colonies.The colonial authorities permitted licensed recruiters to operate from Bombay, Calcutta and Madras. It was mandated by the colonial government that the emigration of labourers had to be on a voluntary basis, and a number of indentured emigrants did go \u2018voluntarily\u2019. However, several of them were also tricked or kidnapped by unlicensed recruiters or agents called \u2018arktias<\/em>\u2019. These intermediariesdrew upon their \u201cknowledge of local villages, shantytowns, temples, bazars, and\u00a0railway stations to recruit the most vulnerable and desperate individuals\u201d to recruit people and transferred them to licensed recruiters(For details see Kara 2014). The licensed recruiters took the potential emigrants to depots where they were briefed, medically examined and their travel papers were readied. They were then shipped in inhuman conditions, usually in overcrowded old sailing boats, which were later upgraded with the introduction of the steam ships. Records of deaths during passage from India to South Africa affirm that diseases and deaths were frequent during the long drawn voyages. Women were subjected to rape and sexual assault by fellow emigrants as well as crew members. But this exploitative system continued because the \u201ctransportation of human cargo was a profitable business\u201d (Henning: 1993:30)<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n\r\n \r\n

At the completion of their contact period the indentured labourerswere given two options; a free return passage to India or a contract for another term of 5 years of indenture. At the conclusion of the second term of contract they could claim free passage to India or a small plot of land to settle down in their new homeland in lieu of the passes for return passage (Kuper 1960:2).<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\n2. INDENTURED LABOUR IN SOUTH AFRICA: A CASE STUDY<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n

Indentured labourers were shipped to the province of Natal, the British colony in South Africa between 1860 to 1911 to workin the sugar cane plantations(Reddy 2007: 1).A less knownfact is that the \u201cNatal government railways was one of the biggest employers of indentured laboureres where they worked as carriage builders, porters, signalman, lamp attendants and inother jobs\u201d (Dhupelia 2000: photo no. 14).As per a report in the \u2018Durban Observer\u2019 dated 17th of October 1851, the first recorded reference to Natal Colonists\u2019 demand for indentured labour was at a meeting of citizens held at the Durban Government School.Historically, it must be noted that the first Indians - four people - were brought to Natal as early as 1849. In fact, Indian engagement with South Africa goes back to the days of slave trade from South Asia to the Cape in the 17th century and later, the indentured labourers and free traders docked at the port of Natal. During the 17th and 18th centuries, over 50 percent of all slaves to the Cape were Indians from Bengal or the Coromondal coast in South India (Reddy 2007:1; Hofmeyer and Williams 2011: 2; MEA 2001: 75). They married slaves from East Asia, other Africans from the indigenous Khoikhoi and San inhabitants ( MEA 2001:75).<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n\r\n3. INDIAN IMMIGRANTS IN SOUTH AFRICA<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n

Indian immigrants in South Africa can be categorized into three groups \u2014 \u2018indentured\u2019 immigrants who were in their contract period; \u2018free\u2019 Indians who had completed their period of indenture and stayed on and worked in Natal or other parts of South Africa and did not return to India; and \u2018Passenger Indians\u2019.Unlike the contractual indentured labourers, - thePassenger Indians paid their own fares and came to South Africa as traders, merchants and entrepreneurs. They were mainly from the Gujarati Muslim community, though some of them were from the higher-caste Gujarati Hindu communities as well.These immigrants were allowed to own property, engage in trading activities. They could own land as well as vote in local government elections (Bhana, Narendra, n. d.).For unskilled labourers, the colonial documents frequently use the term 'coolie<\/em>' ( with disrespectful connotations). People from varied socio- economic and occupational strata in India: Hindus, Brahmins, other high castes, agriculturists, artisans, Mussulmans, low castes, and Christians agreed to enter into indentured labour contracts. The push factor could be due of famines and economic distress in various parts of the country in the nineteenth century (National Archives 2007: 3). The indentured labourers were from different localities, cultures, spoke different languages and followed diverse religions. But a majority of them were Tamil speaking and about eighty percent of the immigrants were Hindus (Jithoo 1991: 346; See also Oonk 2007: 4-5).<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\n3.1 The Demand for Indentured Labour<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n

The British settlement governed Natal in 1843 as a dependency of the Cape Colony and later, in 1856 Natal became a Crown Colony. The Colony of Natal had a highly developed sugar-cane belt that stretched roughly for a hundred miles along the coast.The cultivation of sugar cane in Natal begun in the year 1850 (Chattopadhyay 1970: pp.19-22). There was an acute shortage of labour after slavery was abolished, because the natives from the province of Natal refused to work on the plantations. Initially the Natal planters attempted to address the problem by importing Chineselabourers from Java and offered thema payment of 10 shillings per month. But they demanded higher wages and therefore this option was not considered viable (Chattopadhyay 1970: 19-22).<\/p>\r\n \r\n

The sugar planters then petitioned the Natal Government for an alternative source of labour recruitment. One option seemed to be through the import of labour from abroad.The Natal Legislative Council passed several Acts in 1859 including Act number 14. This Act gave rights for\u00a0importing, regulating and governing immigrants at public expense. It also provided for the appointment of a \u201cCoolie Immigration Agent\u201d, in charge of the \u201cCoolie Immigration Department\u201d (Francis 1983: 5-6). Imported labour contributed immensely to the development of the plantation economy as evinced from the fact that for about \u201c25 years (1874- 1987) the Natal government contributed $10,000 per annum from public funds\u201d for importing foreign labour (Kuper 1960:2). Barring the eight years (1866-1897), when the shipment of indentured labour to South Africa was terminated, this system of recruiting continued until 1911. From 1911 onwards, the system of indentured labour was discontinued due to the lack of clarity about the \u201crights of free Indians\u201d after they completed a period of ten years as indentured workers and the withdrawal of the provision of Crown land in 1891, to those who had completed two five year terms as indentured workers (Kuper 1960: 2-3).<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n3.2 Shipment of \u2018Human Cargo\u2019<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n

The first group of Indian labourers boarded the ship, \u201cTruro\u201d, and landed at the port of Durban on 16 November, 1860. Another batch of indentured workers onboard the \u2018Belvedere\u2019 that sailed from Calcutta disembarked at the Port of Natal on the 26thof November. Both the ships carried 342 passengers each. This was the start of the 51-year period of export of human labour from India to Natal (Henning 1979:30). Some travelled alone, while others brought their families to settle in the colonies they would work in. \u201cOf the passengers, 62 percent were men, 25percent were women while 13 percent were minors. Two thirds of the emigrants were Tamil and Telugu speaking Hindus from the Madras Presidency, and the rest of them were from Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Bengal. The majority of the immigrants were Hindus.Muslims and Christians constituted 13 and 2 percent of the indentured population, respectively\u201d (MEA 2001:75-76). There was a gender imbalance in the group of immigrants that sailed to South Africa, as women comprised less than half the number of the adult male labourers Henning 1979:32- 34), though it was mandated that for every group of hundred indentured labourers that were exported to Natal, 40 percent had to be women( Kuper 1960: 17). By the year 1911, when the system of indenture to South Africa was abolished, the total number of Indians immigrants to South Africa was estimated at 1,42,670 (Chattopadhyay 1970: 39).<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n\r\n\"\"\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n\"\"\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n
\r\n\r\n\"\"\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n3.3 Reasons for Labour Emigration from India to South Africa<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nThere were several reasons for the emigration of Indian labourers to Natal. These are;\r\n\r\n \r\n

i.\u00a0 \u00a0The abolition of slavery in 1833 in the British empire.<\/p>\r\n

ii. The oppressive caste system which made the masses economically and socially dependent on the land owning dominant classes. This led to the lack of social and economic mobility amongst them and compelled the impoverished agriculturists to seek other avenues for livelihood generation, such as through emigration abroad.<\/p>\r\n

iii.\u00a0Decline of cotton and other manufacturing industries left artisans, smelters, weavers, spinners with little or no livelihood options.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n

\u00a0 \u00a0iv. Natural calamities due to failure of monsoons, periodic famines, crop diseases and unjust land taxation policies imposed by the colonial government further aggravated the economic plight of the agricultural labourers and artisans. Thus it is is no coincidence that during the famine years there was a rise in the numbers of dispossessed people who were willing to emigrate (Reddy 2007: 1).<\/p>\r\n

v. Though recruits for plantations in Natal were drawn from various parts of the country, there was a higher proportion of Tamil emigrants from South India. The proximity to Madras, an important port of embarkation, and a tradition of emigration through the Kangani<\/em> and Maistry<\/em>( discussedlater in this module) systems to South and South East Asia could be plausible reasons for this ( For details on sources of labour recruitment, see Henning 1979: 21; Saha 1970: 75).<\/p>\r\n

vi.According to Hilda Kuper, a scholar on the subject, the higher proportion of indentured workers from South India can be explained in terms of higher caste restrictions in the region and larger numbers of lower castes in South India ( 1960:18).<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n\"\"\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\nPhoto courtesy: Natal Foundation Society (2010), South Africa.\r\n\r\n \r\n

This segment has offered an interrogation of the social landscape in the sending context of rural India and the lack of economic avenues for livelihood generation in the colonial period.<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\n3.4 Suspension of Emigration to Natal<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n

Working on the plantations entailed hard labour. Indentured workers were also employed in railways, coalmines, municipal services, as domestic servants and in other sectors as well ( MEA 2001:77).The <\/span>labourers worked throughout the week for very long hours. The Wragg Commission of 1885 acknowledged the positive contribution of the Indian indentured workers in Natal ( MEA 2001: Ibid). Despite their immense contribution to the Natal economy, the workers were illtreated and subject to <\/span>corporeal punishment. They were paid a <\/span>meagre wage and deductions were made from their small salary on <\/span>arbitary grounds. If a \u201ccoolie\u201d fell ill, a shilling per day was cut from the wages of 10 shillings\/ month. The commissioners supported these actions because they thought <\/span>that ;\u201cIndians were in a habit of feigning sickness to avoid work. This is known as \u2018humbug illness\u2019 or \u2018 sham illness\u2019 and is an evil everywhere\u201d ( Desai and Vahed, 2010: 75).<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n\r\n \r\n

Besides, the labourers were not given the ration which was agreed to in their service-contracts. These adverse working conditions led to a high number of suicides among the immigrant labourers(MEA, 2001:76-77). The returning Indians reported the harsh treatment they were subjected to in Natal, to the colonial government in India. The Natal government therefore organised the \u201cCoolie Commission\u201d in 1872, to look into the grievances of Indian indentured labourers in Natal. The Commission found many cases of ill treatment, underpayment of wages and lack of medical attention for the workers (Nambi 1985: 25-28). The colonial government discontinued the immigration of Indian Coolies to Natal between 1866 and 1874. During this period, trade was depressed and the employers were unable to pay the passage of the indentured workers.<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\n3.5 Recommendations of the Coolie Commission<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n

The \u2018Coolie Commission\u2019 was established at the insistence of the colonial government in India and the final report was submitted on September 11, 1872. According to Desai and Vahed, these reports were biased, though a few changes were made, the most significant being the appointment of a \u2018Protector\u2019( 2010: 75) . The findings of the Coolie Commission were accepted. Some of the important recommendations made by the Commission were as below:<\/p>\r\n \r\n

\u00b7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 A \u2018Protector of Indian Immigrants\u2019 (earlier known as the \u2018Coolie Agent\u2019) was to be appointed to settle disputes between the employer and the employee and visit and inspect estates where workers were employed.<\/p>\r\n

\u00b7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Protector was entrusted with the responsibility of registering and recording births, deaths and marriages of all Asiatic persons.<\/p>\r\n

\u00b7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The derogative term \u2018coolie\u2019 was discontinued and substituted with the term \u2018Indian immigrants\u2019 (Chattopadhyay 1970: 39).<\/span><\/p>\r\n

\u00b7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Commission stated that the number of women immigrants to South Africa should be increased to address the gender imbalance among the Indian immigrants.<\/span><\/p>\r\n

\u00b7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 It was mandatory for the Natal government to provide educational facilities for the children of immigrants and make education compulsory and provide for the health of medical services to all the Indian immigrants.<\/span><\/p>\r\n

\u00b7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Law No. 12 ( of 1872) exempted Indian labourers from corporeal punishment.<\/span><\/p>\r\n

\u00b7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 About 8 and 10 acres of land outside Durban city was to be allocated to the ex-indentured Indians,in lieu of free return passage to India.However, the provisionof allotting Crown land was discontinued in 1891 and the scheme of indenture was subsequently dropped in the year 1911( For details See South African History Online, Reddy 2007:1, Chattopadhyay 1970:19-22).<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n\r\n \r\n

The Coolie Commission was one of several enquiries. The others were the Shire Commission (1862), the Wragg Commission (1885- 1887), the Reynold Commission (1906), the Indian Commission (1909), and the Solomon Commission (1914) in additional to several other smaller enquiries by the Natal government officials ( For details see Desai and Vahed, 2010:74). \u201c The \u2018 impartial truth\u2019 of such commissions allowed indenture to continue with minimum change for five decades\u201d ( Ibid: 75) . Myers sums up the indentured system thus:<\/p>\r\n \r\n

It was only after the coolie marked his thumb print on the contract ratifying this- the meanest and the weakest of bonds\u2026 after he had been assigned to a work gang\u2026 after his hands had become raw, then hardened from cane, after he had been beaten , fined , jailed, after his rations had been withheld- that the realisation came that he had not crossed the sea to paradise, that the beautiful Queen was not to be found<\/em>\u2026(cited in Desai and Vahed 2010: 83).<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Since 1894, the Indian nationalists debated and expressed concerns about the exploitative system of indenture and the harsh treatment that was meted out to the Indian indentured workers in South Africa (Patel and Uys 2012. 49- 51). The Indian National Congress opposed the indentured labour schemes and highlighted the abusive nature of this mechanism. Finally, amidst national pressure, this system of labour recruitment to South Africa was dismantled in 1911.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n\r\n \r\n

Despite all the hardships and subjection to racist laws, only about 23 percent of the Indians returned to India by 1911. Recent work attempts to overcome a major shortcoming of indentured historiography that explained the phenomenon \u2018as a one way problem\u2019.Earlier historians did not study the impacts, causes and consequences of labourmigration in the sending context i.e. in India, during 1860- 1911. Further, women\u2019s lived experiences and their struggles against multiple oppressions such as sexual violence and acts of resistance against the indenture system by this subaltern constituency that had been overlooked thus far, are now a subject of academic enquiry (See also chapters by Desai and Vahed, Mariam Seedat \u2013Khan, V. Geetha, in Patel and Uys 2012).<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\n4. KANGANI AND MAISTRY SYSTEMS<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n

These were yet other contractual labour recruitment mechanisms that wereconsidered cost-effective, efficient, alternate and reliable mechanisms to outsource Indian unskilled labourers. Such mechanisms were devised to meet the demands of expanding merchant capital under the aegis of British imperialism in Ceylon (present day Sri Lanka), Malaya (present day Malaysia) and Burma (present day Myanmar). In fact, the Kangani<\/em> system coexisted with other forms of recruitment systems in Malaya such as the indenture system and after the decline of this mechanism in 1910, the Kangani<\/em>method gained prominence. This was also the time when large tea and coffee plantations shifted to cultivating rubber in the mid-19th century (For details see Parmer (1960); Sandhu (1969).<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\n4.1Background<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n

The terms Kangani<\/em>andMaistry<\/em> are drawn from the Tamil language and can be translated as \u2018headman\u2019, \u2018foreman\u2019 or \u2018overseer\u2019, while Maistry<\/em> means a \u2018supervisor\u2019. Kangani<\/em>is an anglicized form of the Tamil word \u2018Kankan<\/em>i\u2019 and describes persons who oversee workers (kan<\/em> means \u2018eye\u2019, kani<\/em> means \u2018keep watch\u2019). The term was originally used for those who supervised the agricultural labourers on temple land in South India. The term \u2018Kangani\u2019<\/em> was restricted to men [male supervisors] (Heidemann1992:8).<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Though both the systems shared common characteristics, there were differences among them as well. The Kangani<\/em> system wasexecuted in Ceylon and Malaya, while labour was recruited through the\u00a0Maistry <\/em>system in Burma. Both these systems used \u2018middlemen\u2019 and introduced a debt-bondage relationship to recruit labourers for plantations in theBritishcolonies(Jain, 1990:16).<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n\r\n \r\n

The Kangani<\/em>mobilized or recruited thelabourers from their own extended family members,castefellows ormen from their ownvillage by advancing money for their passage. Hence, the Kangani<\/em>system of labour recruitment was based on the linkages at the village, kinship, caste and region level as well as a debt-bondage relationship. The Kangani<\/em>system was initially introduced to recruit labour for coffee and tea plantations of Ceylon in the early nineteenth century. It was extended to Malaya in the late 19thcentury. This system was disbanded in 1938 subsequent to the banning of Indian immigration to Malaya in the same year. In the case of Ceylon, the Kangani<\/em> system came into existence most likely in the 1820s or latest by the year 1830 and remained in practice until 1940.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

Between 1840 and 1942, under these two systems, it is estimated that over 1.7 million Indians were recruited to work in Malaya (including Singapore), over 1.6 million to Burma and approximately one million to Ceylon (Lal 2007: 53). Through the Kangani<\/em> and Maistry<\/em> systems, labour was recruited from the erstwhile Madras Presidency, in the 19th century. Surplus labour force from the hinterlands in Tamil Nadu were transferred to the tea, coffee and rubber plantations of Western Ghats, Ceylon, Malaya and for rice farming in Burma (Baker1984:179).<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\nThe segment below discusses in details the nature and characteristics of Kangani<\/em>andMaistry<\/em> systems.\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n\"\"\r\n

\r\n\r\n \r\n\r\n4.2 Nature and Characteristics of the Kangani System<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n

The Kangani<\/em>system was a strategy for labour mobilization to develop plantation agriculture in Ceylon and Malaya. Thissystem originated in the Tamil region of southern India. The Kanganis<\/em>were Indian recruiters who were dispatched to India bythe plantation owners with the payment of an advance sum for recruiting prospective labourers or\u2018coolies\u2019 to work in the plantationsabroad.TheKangani<\/em> system of labourrecruitment was based on the close ties of village, kinship, caste, region and debt-bondage relationships (For details see Arasaratnam1970; Sandhu1969). TheKanganis<\/em> were intermediaries who provided an advance payment to the \u2018coolies\u2019 to cover their transportation cost by ship.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

On arrival at the plantation, these groups of labourers of about 25- 20 people each were supervised by the Kangani,<\/em> usuallyexperienced and elderly persons, who were placed above the labourers in the economic hierarchy of the plantation. They formed the main link between the management and the labour force. They were said to be \u201cgenerally of good caste\u201d and \u201cpersons of influence among others and subordinate castes in the village\u2026. who could command the respect of as wider a sector of the community of his village and district as possible\u201d (Arasaratnam1970:17). However, the Kangani<\/em>labour recruitment was not foolproof and known for malpractices, use of coercive, abusive and fraudulent methods since they were tempted by monetary gains offered by the plantation owners for each recruit( Heidemann1992:59).<\/p>\r\n \r\n

To control the labourers, the Kangani<\/em>wasauthorized to punish the defaulters without any prosecution. He was free to choose the methods of social control, which ranged from paternalism to brutal arbitrariness (Heidemann1992:70-71). The Kangani was<\/em> not a \u201cmediator of conflicts between labour and capital: he was very much the agent of capital and his primary role was to subject labour to the rigorous discipline required by the plantation production system\u201d(Ramasamy1992:99).In contrast to the Kangani<\/em> system of Ceylon, the Kanganis<\/em>inMalaya had less power because the labourers received wages directly from the plantation management (For details see Jain 1993). As compared to the indenture system, the Kangani<\/em> system assumed significance because it ensured a reliable, stable labour supply and smooth functioning of the plantations, given the close ties of ascription and subordination of the labourers due to debt-bondage relationship.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

\r\n

The labour relationship of Kangani<\/em> was dynamic in nature. Not only was he the recruiter-cum - foreman or overseer of the labourers, but their patron, negotiator, entrepreneur and financier as well. The Kangani<\/em> intervened and took decisions on professional matters of the labourersand mediated in their domestic disputes. The Kangani<\/em>acted as an \u2018inevitable link\u2019 or \u2018intermediary\u2019 between the planters and labourers in the plantation economic structure (Jain 1993:2368) Further, family, kin and caste ties were preserved and respected much more in the Kangani<\/em> system than under indenture (Jain 1988:128). Moreover, since the Kangani<\/em> recruited labourers from his kindred or village folks of his own region,the physical quality of the labourers was satisfactory in contrast to recruitments through theindenture system. Besides, the Kangani<\/em>system resolved the gender imbalance on the plantations as it encouraged family migration.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

In contrast to the Kangani<\/em>system of Ceylon, the Kangani<\/em> system of Malaya was less dependent on the Kangani<\/em>, as the recruitment process was controlled or regulated by the planters through their recruitment firms. Thus theKangani<\/em>had to depend on or coordinate with the recruitment firms.Moreover, the Kangani<\/em>of Malaya was not the centre of the plantation system unlike in Ceylon, because the plantation management in Malaya disbursed wages directly to the labourers. In addition, due to the existence of aplantation bureaucracy, the planters exercised strong control over both the Kangani <\/em>and the labourers. Thus, the position of Kangani<\/em>in Ceylon was more dominant as compared his counterpart inMalaya.<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\nMaistry <\/em>System in Burma<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n

The Maistry<\/em>system was a variant of the Kangani<\/em>system in terms of recruitment and subordination of labourers to meet the growing demands of unskilled labourers for the colonial economy of Burma. The majority of labourers were drawn from the Andhra region of the erstwhile Madras Presidency. The Workmen\u2019s Breach of Contract Act of 1869 and the Labour Act of 1876 encouraged and established the Maistry<\/em>system for labourrecruitment in Burma. The British India Steam Navigation handled the labour traffic between Burma and India.<\/p>\r\n \r\n

The employers in Burma preferred recruiting Indian workers through the Maistries<\/em> as they found this system cheaper and more manageable. The Maistry<\/em>system, unlike the Kangani<\/em>system, was relatively more structured, hierarchically graded and had a well-defined labour relationship wherein the\u00a0\u201cLabour Contractor, the Head <\/span>Maistry<\/em>, the Charge <\/span>Maistry<\/em>and the Gang <\/span>Maistry<\/em> constituted the hierarchy of middlemen employers\u201d (Kondapi1951: 41).<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n \r\n

The main characteristic of the Maistry<\/em> system of labour recruitment was the enslavement of labourers to the middlemen-employers due to the debt-bondage system. The recruits were controlled through illegal deductions of wages and its disbursement by middlemen-employers. The system was highly exploitative and coercive. The same wages werepaid for work in the daytime as well as at night. Further, in contrast to the Kangani<\/em> system, under the Maistry<\/em> scheme, the labourers were subservienttothe Maistry<\/em>and not to the factory or rice farm owners.Besides, the position of the Maistry<\/em>was dominant because he had the power to dismiss thelabourers arbitrarily (AdapaSatyanarayana2001:16).<\/p>\r\n \r\n

The Act of 1869 was repealed later as it was very oppressive and aggravated labour relations. The Maistry <\/em>system was finally abolished in 1937 due to the poor safeguards and working conditions that it offered to its labourrecruits(For details see Kondapi 1951; AdapaSatyanarayana 2001).<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\nConclusion<\/strong>\r\n\r\n \r\n

All the three contractual laboursystemsacted as \u2018agency\u2019 for the mass exodus of unskilled labourers, the \u2018coolies\u2019 from India. These mechanisms were cleverly crafted to meet the demands of unskilled labourers in the various parts of the British Empire and ensure theircirculation between India and the Britishcolonies. The predominant role of \u2018middlemen\u2019 or \u2018agents\u2019 in terms of recruitment and the transportation of labour was the notablefeature of these labour recruitment mechanisms. These mechanisms offered an alternative to slavery and extended to the workers limited safeguards to their working conditions (Kuper 1960: 2). Despite all the hardships that the Indian immigrant workers were subjected to, a majority of them stayed on in their countries of adoption. Over the years they have exhibited resilience, and through their hard work and resolve, their descendants haveadapted to the socio- political and economic circumstances in their host contexts. Today, the descendants of these working class emigrants constitute significant ethnic minority communities in their respective countries of adoption were born and grew up in and now consider as their home.<\/p>\r\n \r\n\r\nREFERENCES\u00a0<\/strong>Books<\/em><\/strong>\r\n

    \r\n \t
  • Arasaratnam, S. (1970) Indian in Malaysia and Singapore<\/em>. London: Oxford University Press.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Baker, C. J. (1984)An Indian Rural Economy 1880-1955: The Tamil Nadu Countryside.<\/em> Oxford:Clarendon Press.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Breman, Jan. (1989) Taming the Coolie Beast: Plantation Society and the Colonial Order in\u00a0<\/em>Southeast Asia. <\/em>NewDelhi: Oxford University Press.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Chabbra, HariSharan (1986) India and Africa: a Saga of Friendship<\/em>. New Delhi: Thomas Press Ltd.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Chakravarti, N.R. (1971) The Indian Minority in Burma<\/em> \u2013<\/em> The Rise and Decline of an Immigrant<\/em> Community. <\/em>London: Oxford University Press.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Chattopadhyay, Haraprasad (1970) Indians in Africa.<\/em> Calcutta: Book land Pvt. Ltd.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Clarke, C., et.al. (Eds.) (1990) South Asians Overseas: Migration and Ethnicity.<\/em> Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Gangulee, Nagendranath (1947) Indians in the Empire Overseas: A Survey Charles Freer Andrews\u00a0<\/em>Memorial Volume. <\/em>New Delhi: New India Publishing House.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Heidemann, Frank M. (1992) Kanganies in Sri Lanka and Malaysia: Tamil Recruiter-Cum-Foreman\u00a0<\/em>as a Sociological Category in the 19th and 20th Century.<\/em>M\u00fcnchen (AnaconVerlag): Tokyo University of Foreign Studies (mimeographed).<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Henning, C.G (1979) The Indentured Indian in Natal.<\/em> New Delhi: Promilla and Co. Publishers.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Hofmeyer, Isabel and Williams, Michelle (ed.) (2011) South Africa and India Shaping the Global<\/em> South. <\/em>South Africa: Wits University Press.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Jain, R. K. (1988) Overseas Indians in Malaysia and the Carribbean: Comparative Notes. In Howard\u00a0Johnson (ed.) After the Crossing.<\/em> London: Frank Cass.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Jain, R. K., (1970) South Indians on the Plantation Frontier in Malaya<\/em>. London: New Haven.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Jayaraman, R. (1975) Caste Continuities in Ceylon: A Study of the Social Structure in Three Tea\u00a0<\/em>Estates. <\/em>Bombay: Popular Prakashan.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Kara, Siddharth (2014) Bonded Labor: Tackling the System of Slavery in South Asia.<\/em> New York:Columbia University Press.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Kondapi, C. (1951) Indian Overseas, 1838-1949.<\/em> New Delhi: Indian Council of World Affairs.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Kuper, Hilda (1960) Indian People in Natal<\/em>. Natal: University Press.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Lal, Brij V. (1983) Girmitiyas: The Origins of the Fiji Indians.<\/em> Canberra: Journal of Pacific History Inc.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Myers H. (1998) Music of Hindu Trinidad: Somgs from the Indian Diaspora.<\/em>Chicago: University of Chicago Press.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Nambi, Arooran. K (1985) Indians in Natal.<\/em> Thanjavur: Tamil University.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Oonk, Gijsbert (2007) Global Indian Diasporas Exploring Trajectories of Migration and<\/em> Theory.<\/em>Netherlands.Amsterdam University Press.International Institute for Asian Studies (IIAS).<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Parmer, J. N. (1960) Colonial Policy and Administration: A History of Labour in the Rubber\u00a0\u00a0<\/em>Plantation Industry in Malaya. 1910-1941<\/em>. New York: J. J. August in Inc.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Saha, Panchanan (1970) Emigration of Indian Labour.<\/em> Delhi: People\u2019s Publishing House.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Sandhu, Kernial Singh (1969) Indians in Malaya: Some Aspects of their Immigration and Settlement\u00a0<\/em>(1786-1957). <\/em>London: Cambridge University Press.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Tinker, H. (1974) A New System of Slavery: The Export of Indian Overseas, 1830-1920.<\/em> London:\u00a0Oxford University Press.<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Uma DhupeliaMesthrie( 2000) From Cane Fields to Freedom<\/em>. Cape Town: Kwela Books.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n
      \r\n \t
    1. eetha (2012) \u2018In a faraway sugar cane field: imagining indentured labour in colonial India\u2019 in\u00a0Patel, Sujata and Uys, Tina (eds.) Contemporary India and South Africa<\/em>. UK: Routledge.Vahed.G and Desai.A.(2010) Inside Indian Indenture.<\/em>South Africa: HRSC Press<\/li>\r\n \t
    2. Wesumperuma, Dharmapriya (1986) Indian Immigrant Plantation Workers in Sri Lanka: a Historical\u00a0<\/em>Perspective 1880-1910. <\/em>Kelanya (Sri Lanka): Vidyalankara Press.<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>","rendered":"
      \n

      1. INTRODUCTION<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      After the onset of the industrial revolution in England, British colonial capital expanded around the globe. At the same time there was a huge demand for unskilled labourers for the development and expansion of plantation economies in the British colonies, mainly in the sugar producing colonies and tea and rubber plantation colonies. But \u201cafter the passing of the Act of Abolition (1833) by the British government, slavery [a source of cheap labour] was banned throughout the British Empire\u201d (MEA 2001: 76) The sugar planters put acute pressure on the British government to combat the depressed sugar industry market, that went into a temporary decline after the withdrawal of slavery, a source of labour. Britain decided to recruit and export a large amount of Indian indentured labourersto the sugar producing colonies across the globe(National Archives 2007: p. 2).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      India as a colony of British Empire, a \u2018jewel in the crown\u2019 became an ideal target for outsourcing cheaplabour as it had reserves of population who lived in poor socio- economic conditions. Further, they were burdened with unjustified taxes under the colonial regime.Therefore land holding peasants were turned to rootless labourers and eventually forced to work in factories and onto plantations through the world. To meet the ever increasing demand for labour, innovative recruitment schemes were devised by the British colonial regime, namely: the indenture, Kangani<\/em>andMaistry<\/em>systems(See Kuper 1960: 2).These schemes were designed to transfer unskilled labourersfrom India to the British coloniesinteralia<\/em>in South Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia, the focus areas of this e-module. It\u00a0was against this background that Indians began contracting their labour from about 1834 to the plantations of the world until the indenture, <\/span>Kangani<\/em> and <\/span>Maistry<\/em> systems were abolished (See Reddy 2007: 1).<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \n

       <\/p>\n

      1.1.Definition, Origins and Terms of Indenture<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      Defining indenture<\/em>: The concept of \u2018indenture\u2019 amounts to an individual being bound to work according to a prescribed contract. It refers to the \u201ctransfer of labour power from metropoles to colonies\u201d or as a\u201c system of bonded labour with a resemblance to slavery\u201d (Harris 2010: 147).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      The indenture system commenced in 1834 to outsource Indian labourers to Mauritius, Uganda and Nigeria. Later, it was expanded to other countries: Guyana(1838), New Zealand(1840), Hong Kong (1841), Trinidad and Tobago and Malaya (1844), Martinique and Guadeloupe(1854),Grenada(1856), St.Lucia(1858) and St.VincentandNatal(1860) (Lal et al 2007). The colonial Government in India passed Act No. XXXIII of 1860 which extended the provision of Act No.21 of 1855 to include the Colony of Natal (Francis 1983: p.4).Immigration agencies were set up at the port cities ofBombay, Madras, and Calcutta, for the recruitment of Indian labourers. At each of the recruitment agencies, there was a government official- the \u2018Protector of Emigrants\u2019 to ensure that no coercion was used on the emigrant and that the emigrant understood about the five-year contract he was making. In Natal, the Act 14 of 1859 provided for the appointment of a \u2018Coolie Immigration Agent\u2019, in charge of the Coolie Immigration Department (Ibid: 5-6). Later the recruitment system was extended to St.Kitts (1861), Japan and Surinam (1872), Jamaica (1873), Fiji (1879), Burma(1885), Canada(1904) and Thailand(1910)(Clarkeet al. 1990).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      The indentured labourers were popularly known as \u2018girmityas<\/em>\u2019 (a colloquial expression for \u2018those who signed the agreement\u2019)(For details see Lal1997).The essential feature of the indenturelabour scheme was that it was contractual in nature. Under this scheme, workers could be contracted for a period of five years. This modality ensured a steady flow of labourers to the plantations in the British colonies.The colonial authorities permitted licensed recruiters to operate from Bombay, Calcutta and Madras. It was mandated by the colonial government that the emigration of labourers had to be on a voluntary basis, and a number of indentured emigrants did go \u2018voluntarily\u2019. However, several of them were also tricked or kidnapped by unlicensed recruiters or agents called \u2018arktias<\/em>\u2019. These intermediariesdrew upon their \u201cknowledge of local villages, shantytowns, temples, bazars, and\u00a0railway stations to recruit the most vulnerable and desperate individuals\u201d to recruit people and transferred them to licensed recruiters(For details see Kara 2014). The licensed recruiters took the potential emigrants to depots where they were briefed, medically examined and their travel papers were readied. They were then shipped in inhuman conditions, usually in overcrowded old sailing boats, which were later upgraded with the introduction of the steam ships. Records of deaths during passage from India to South Africa affirm that diseases and deaths were frequent during the long drawn voyages. Women were subjected to rape and sexual assault by fellow emigrants as well as crew members. But this exploitative system continued because the \u201ctransportation of human cargo was a profitable business\u201d (Henning: 1993:30)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \n

       <\/p>\n

      At the completion of their contact period the indentured labourerswere given two options; a free return passage to India or a contract for another term of 5 years of indenture. At the conclusion of the second term of contract they could claim free passage to India or a small plot of land to settle down in their new homeland in lieu of the passes for return passage (Kuper 1960:2).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      2. INDENTURED LABOUR IN SOUTH AFRICA: A CASE STUDY<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      Indentured labourers were shipped to the province of Natal, the British colony in South Africa between 1860 to 1911 to workin the sugar cane plantations(Reddy 2007: 1).A less knownfact is that the \u201cNatal government railways was one of the biggest employers of indentured laboureres where they worked as carriage builders, porters, signalman, lamp attendants and inother jobs\u201d (Dhupelia 2000: photo no. 14).As per a report in the \u2018Durban Observer\u2019 dated 17th of October 1851, the first recorded reference to Natal Colonists\u2019 demand for indentured labour was at a meeting of citizens held at the Durban Government School.Historically, it must be noted that the first Indians – four people – were brought to Natal as early as 1849. In fact, Indian engagement with South Africa goes back to the days of slave trade from South Asia to the Cape in the 17th century and later, the indentured labourers and free traders docked at the port of Natal. During the 17th and 18th centuries, over 50 percent of all slaves to the Cape were Indians from Bengal or the Coromondal coast in South India (Reddy 2007:1; Hofmeyer and Williams 2011: 2; MEA 2001: 75). They married slaves from East Asia, other Africans from the indigenous Khoikhoi and San inhabitants ( MEA 2001:75).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \n

      3. INDIAN IMMIGRANTS IN SOUTH AFRICA<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      Indian immigrants in South Africa can be categorized into three groups \u2014 \u2018indentured\u2019 immigrants who were in their contract period; \u2018free\u2019 Indians who had completed their period of indenture and stayed on and worked in Natal or other parts of South Africa and did not return to India; and \u2018Passenger Indians\u2019.Unlike the contractual indentured labourers, – thePassenger Indians paid their own fares and came to South Africa as traders, merchants and entrepreneurs. They were mainly from the Gujarati Muslim community, though some of them were from the higher-caste Gujarati Hindu communities as well.These immigrants were allowed to own property, engage in trading activities. They could own land as well as vote in local government elections (Bhana, Narendra, n. d.).For unskilled labourers, the colonial documents frequently use the term ‘coolie<\/em>‘ ( with disrespectful connotations). People from varied socio- economic and occupational strata in India: Hindus, Brahmins, other high castes, agriculturists, artisans, Mussulmans, low castes, and Christians agreed to enter into indentured labour contracts. The push factor could be due of famines and economic distress in various parts of the country in the nineteenth century (National Archives 2007: 3). The indentured labourers were from different localities, cultures, spoke different languages and followed diverse religions. But a majority of them were Tamil speaking and about eighty percent of the immigrants were Hindus (Jithoo 1991: 346; See also Oonk 2007: 4-5).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      3.1 The Demand for Indentured Labour<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      The British settlement governed Natal in 1843 as a dependency of the Cape Colony and later, in 1856 Natal became a Crown Colony. The Colony of Natal had a highly developed sugar-cane belt that stretched roughly for a hundred miles along the coast.The cultivation of sugar cane in Natal begun in the year 1850 (Chattopadhyay 1970: pp.19-22). There was an acute shortage of labour after slavery was abolished, because the natives from the province of Natal refused to work on the plantations. Initially the Natal planters attempted to address the problem by importing Chineselabourers from Java and offered thema payment of 10 shillings per month. But they demanded higher wages and therefore this option was not considered viable (Chattopadhyay 1970: 19-22).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      The sugar planters then petitioned the Natal Government for an alternative source of labour recruitment. One option seemed to be through the import of labour from abroad.The Natal Legislative Council passed several Acts in 1859 including Act number 14. This Act gave rights for\u00a0importing, regulating and governing immigrants at public expense. It also provided for the appointment of a \u201cCoolie Immigration Agent\u201d, in charge of the \u201cCoolie Immigration Department\u201d (Francis 1983: 5-6). Imported labour contributed immensely to the development of the plantation economy as evinced from the fact that for about \u201c25 years (1874- 1987) the Natal government contributed $10,000 per annum from public funds\u201d for importing foreign labour (Kuper 1960:2). Barring the eight years (1866-1897), when the shipment of indentured labour to South Africa was terminated, this system of recruiting continued until 1911. From 1911 onwards, the system of indentured labour was discontinued due to the lack of clarity about the \u201crights of free Indians\u201d after they completed a period of ten years as indentured workers and the withdrawal of the provision of Crown land in 1891, to those who had completed two five year terms as indentured workers (Kuper 1960: 2-3).<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \n

       <\/p>\n

      3.2 Shipment of \u2018Human Cargo\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      The first group of Indian labourers boarded the ship, \u201cTruro\u201d, and landed at the port of Durban on 16 November, 1860. Another batch of indentured workers onboard the \u2018Belvedere\u2019 that sailed from Calcutta disembarked at the Port of Natal on the 26thof November. Both the ships carried 342 passengers each. This was the start of the 51-year period of export of human labour from India to Natal (Henning 1979:30). Some travelled alone, while others brought their families to settle in the colonies they would work in. \u201cOf the passengers, 62 percent were men, 25percent were women while 13 percent were minors. Two thirds of the emigrants were Tamil and Telugu speaking Hindus from the Madras Presidency, and the rest of them were from Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Bengal. The majority of the immigrants were Hindus.Muslims and Christians constituted 13 and 2 percent of the indentured population, respectively\u201d (MEA 2001:75-76). There was a gender imbalance in the group of immigrants that sailed to South Africa, as women comprised less than half the number of the adult male labourers Henning 1979:32- 34), though it was mandated that for every group of hundred indentured labourers that were exported to Natal, 40 percent had to be women( Kuper 1960: 17). By the year 1911, when the system of indenture to South Africa was abolished, the total number of Indians immigrants to South Africa was estimated at 1,42,670 (Chattopadhyay 1970: 39).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \n

      \"\"<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      \"\"<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \n

      \"\"<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      3.3 Reasons for Labour Emigration from India to South Africa<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      There were several reasons for the emigration of Indian labourers to Natal. These are;<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      i.\u00a0 \u00a0The abolition of slavery in 1833 in the British empire.<\/p>\n

      ii. The oppressive caste system which made the masses economically and socially dependent on the land owning dominant classes. This led to the lack of social and economic mobility amongst them and compelled the impoverished agriculturists to seek other avenues for livelihood generation, such as through emigration abroad.<\/p>\n

      iii.\u00a0Decline of cotton and other manufacturing industries left artisans, smelters, weavers, spinners with little or no livelihood options.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \n

      \u00a0 \u00a0iv. Natural calamities due to failure of monsoons, periodic famines, crop diseases and unjust land taxation policies imposed by the colonial government further aggravated the economic plight of the agricultural labourers and artisans. Thus it is is no coincidence that during the famine years there was a rise in the numbers of dispossessed people who were willing to emigrate (Reddy 2007: 1).<\/p>\n

      v. Though recruits for plantations in Natal were drawn from various parts of the country, there was a higher proportion of Tamil emigrants from South India. The proximity to Madras, an important port of embarkation, and a tradition of emigration through the Kangani<\/em> and Maistry<\/em>( discussedlater in this module) systems to South and South East Asia could be plausible reasons for this ( For details on sources of labour recruitment, see Henning 1979: 21; Saha 1970: 75).<\/p>\n

      vi.According to Hilda Kuper, a scholar on the subject, the higher proportion of indentured workers from South India can be explained in terms of higher caste restrictions in the region and larger numbers of lower castes in South India ( 1960:18).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      \"\"<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      Photo courtesy: Natal Foundation Society (2010), South Africa.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      This segment has offered an interrogation of the social landscape in the sending context of rural India and the lack of economic avenues for livelihood generation in the colonial period.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      3.4 Suspension of Emigration to Natal<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      Working on the plantations entailed hard labour. Indentured workers were also employed in railways, coalmines, municipal services, as domestic servants and in other sectors as well ( MEA 2001:77).The <\/span>labourers worked throughout the week for very long hours. The Wragg Commission of 1885 acknowledged the positive contribution of the Indian indentured workers in Natal ( MEA 2001: Ibid). Despite their immense contribution to the Natal economy, the workers were illtreated and subject to <\/span>corporeal punishment. They were paid a <\/span>meagre wage and deductions were made from their small salary on <\/span>arbitary grounds. If a \u201ccoolie\u201d fell ill, a shilling per day was cut from the wages of 10 shillings\/ month. The commissioners supported these actions because they thought <\/span>that ;\u201cIndians were in a habit of feigning sickness to avoid work. This is known as \u2018humbug illness\u2019 or \u2018 sham illness\u2019 and is an evil everywhere\u201d ( Desai and Vahed, 2010: 75).<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \n

       <\/p>\n

      Besides, the labourers were not given the ration which was agreed to in their service-contracts. These adverse working conditions led to a high number of suicides among the immigrant labourers(MEA, 2001:76-77). The returning Indians reported the harsh treatment they were subjected to in Natal, to the colonial government in India. The Natal government therefore organised the \u201cCoolie Commission\u201d in 1872, to look into the grievances of Indian indentured labourers in Natal. The Commission found many cases of ill treatment, underpayment of wages and lack of medical attention for the workers (Nambi 1985: 25-28). The colonial government discontinued the immigration of Indian Coolies to Natal between 1866 and 1874. During this period, trade was depressed and the employers were unable to pay the passage of the indentured workers.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      3.5 Recommendations of the Coolie Commission<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      The \u2018Coolie Commission\u2019 was established at the insistence of the colonial government in India and the final report was submitted on September 11, 1872. According to Desai and Vahed, these reports were biased, though a few changes were made, the most significant being the appointment of a \u2018Protector\u2019( 2010: 75) . The findings of the Coolie Commission were accepted. Some of the important recommendations made by the Commission were as below:<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      \u00b7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 A \u2018Protector of Indian Immigrants\u2019 (earlier known as the \u2018Coolie Agent\u2019) was to be appointed to settle disputes between the employer and the employee and visit and inspect estates where workers were employed.<\/p>\n

      \u00b7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Protector was entrusted with the responsibility of registering and recording births, deaths and marriages of all Asiatic persons.<\/p>\n

      \u00b7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The derogative term \u2018coolie\u2019 was discontinued and substituted with the term \u2018Indian immigrants\u2019 (Chattopadhyay 1970: 39).<\/span><\/p>\n

      \u00b7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The Commission stated that the number of women immigrants to South Africa should be increased to address the gender imbalance among the Indian immigrants.<\/span><\/p>\n

      \u00b7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 It was mandatory for the Natal government to provide educational facilities for the children of immigrants and make education compulsory and provide for the health of medical services to all the Indian immigrants.<\/span><\/p>\n

      \u00b7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 Law No. 12 ( of 1872) exempted Indian labourers from corporeal punishment.<\/span><\/p>\n

      \u00b7\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 About 8 and 10 acres of land outside Durban city was to be allocated to the ex-indentured Indians,in lieu of free return passage to India.However, the provisionof allotting Crown land was discontinued in 1891 and the scheme of indenture was subsequently dropped in the year 1911( For details See South African History Online, Reddy 2007:1, Chattopadhyay 1970:19-22).<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \n

       <\/p>\n

      The Coolie Commission was one of several enquiries. The others were the Shire Commission (1862), the Wragg Commission (1885- 1887), the Reynold Commission (1906), the Indian Commission (1909), and the Solomon Commission (1914) in additional to several other smaller enquiries by the Natal government officials ( For details see Desai and Vahed, 2010:74). \u201c The \u2018 impartial truth\u2019 of such commissions allowed indenture to continue with minimum change for five decades\u201d ( Ibid: 75) . Myers sums up the indentured system thus:<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      It was only after the coolie marked his thumb print on the contract ratifying this- the meanest and the weakest of bonds\u2026 after he had been assigned to a work gang\u2026 after his hands had become raw, then hardened from cane, after he had been beaten , fined , jailed, after his rations had been withheld- that the realisation came that he had not crossed the sea to paradise, that the beautiful Queen was not to be found<\/em>\u2026(cited in Desai and Vahed 2010: 83).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      Since 1894, the Indian nationalists debated and expressed concerns about the exploitative system of indenture and the harsh treatment that was meted out to the Indian indentured workers in South Africa (Patel and Uys 2012. 49- 51). The Indian National Congress opposed the indentured labour schemes and highlighted the abusive nature of this mechanism. Finally, amidst national pressure, this system of labour recruitment to South Africa was dismantled in 1911.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \n

       <\/p>\n

      Despite all the hardships and subjection to racist laws, only about 23 percent of the Indians returned to India by 1911. Recent work attempts to overcome a major shortcoming of indentured historiography that explained the phenomenon \u2018as a one way problem\u2019.Earlier historians did not study the impacts, causes and consequences of labourmigration in the sending context i.e. in India, during 1860- 1911. Further, women\u2019s lived experiences and their struggles against multiple oppressions such as sexual violence and acts of resistance against the indenture system by this subaltern constituency that had been overlooked thus far, are now a subject of academic enquiry (See also chapters by Desai and Vahed, Mariam Seedat \u2013Khan, V. Geetha, in Patel and Uys 2012).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      4. KANGANI AND MAISTRY SYSTEMS<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      These were yet other contractual labour recruitment mechanisms that wereconsidered cost-effective, efficient, alternate and reliable mechanisms to outsource Indian unskilled labourers. Such mechanisms were devised to meet the demands of expanding merchant capital under the aegis of British imperialism in Ceylon (present day Sri Lanka), Malaya (present day Malaysia) and Burma (present day Myanmar). In fact, the Kangani<\/em> system coexisted with other forms of recruitment systems in Malaya such as the indenture system and after the decline of this mechanism in 1910, the Kangani<\/em>method gained prominence. This was also the time when large tea and coffee plantations shifted to cultivating rubber in the mid-19th century (For details see Parmer (1960); Sandhu (1969).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      4.1Background<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      The terms Kangani<\/em>andMaistry<\/em> are drawn from the Tamil language and can be translated as \u2018headman\u2019, \u2018foreman\u2019 or \u2018overseer\u2019, while Maistry<\/em> means a \u2018supervisor\u2019. Kangani<\/em>is an anglicized form of the Tamil word \u2018Kankan<\/em>i\u2019 and describes persons who oversee workers (kan<\/em> means \u2018eye\u2019, kani<\/em> means \u2018keep watch\u2019). The term was originally used for those who supervised the agricultural labourers on temple land in South India. The term \u2018Kangani\u2019<\/em> was restricted to men [male supervisors] (Heidemann1992:8).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      Though both the systems shared common characteristics, there were differences among them as well. The Kangani<\/em> system wasexecuted in Ceylon and Malaya, while labour was recruited through the\u00a0Maistry <\/em>system in Burma. Both these systems used \u2018middlemen\u2019 and introduced a debt-bondage relationship to recruit labourers for plantations in theBritishcolonies(Jain, 1990:16).<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \n

       <\/p>\n

      The Kangani<\/em>mobilized or recruited thelabourers from their own extended family members,castefellows ormen from their ownvillage by advancing money for their passage. Hence, the Kangani<\/em>system of labour recruitment was based on the linkages at the village, kinship, caste and region level as well as a debt-bondage relationship. The Kangani<\/em>system was initially introduced to recruit labour for coffee and tea plantations of Ceylon in the early nineteenth century. It was extended to Malaya in the late 19thcentury. This system was disbanded in 1938 subsequent to the banning of Indian immigration to Malaya in the same year. In the case of Ceylon, the Kangani<\/em> system came into existence most likely in the 1820s or latest by the year 1830 and remained in practice until 1940.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      Between 1840 and 1942, under these two systems, it is estimated that over 1.7 million Indians were recruited to work in Malaya (including Singapore), over 1.6 million to Burma and approximately one million to Ceylon (Lal 2007: 53). Through the Kangani<\/em> and Maistry<\/em> systems, labour was recruited from the erstwhile Madras Presidency, in the 19th century. Surplus labour force from the hinterlands in Tamil Nadu were transferred to the tea, coffee and rubber plantations of Western Ghats, Ceylon, Malaya and for rice farming in Burma (Baker1984:179).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      The segment below discusses in details the nature and characteristics of Kangani<\/em>andMaistry<\/em> systems.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \"\"<\/p>\n

      \n

       <\/p>\n

      4.2 Nature and Characteristics of the Kangani System<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      The Kangani<\/em>system was a strategy for labour mobilization to develop plantation agriculture in Ceylon and Malaya. Thissystem originated in the Tamil region of southern India. The Kanganis<\/em>were Indian recruiters who were dispatched to India bythe plantation owners with the payment of an advance sum for recruiting prospective labourers or\u2018coolies\u2019 to work in the plantationsabroad.TheKangani<\/em> system of labourrecruitment was based on the close ties of village, kinship, caste, region and debt-bondage relationships (For details see Arasaratnam1970; Sandhu1969). TheKanganis<\/em> were intermediaries who provided an advance payment to the \u2018coolies\u2019 to cover their transportation cost by ship.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      On arrival at the plantation, these groups of labourers of about 25- 20 people each were supervised by the Kangani,<\/em> usuallyexperienced and elderly persons, who were placed above the labourers in the economic hierarchy of the plantation. They formed the main link between the management and the labour force. They were said to be \u201cgenerally of good caste\u201d and \u201cpersons of influence among others and subordinate castes in the village\u2026. who could command the respect of as wider a sector of the community of his village and district as possible\u201d (Arasaratnam1970:17). However, the Kangani<\/em>labour recruitment was not foolproof and known for malpractices, use of coercive, abusive and fraudulent methods since they were tempted by monetary gains offered by the plantation owners for each recruit( Heidemann1992:59).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      To control the labourers, the Kangani<\/em>wasauthorized to punish the defaulters without any prosecution. He was free to choose the methods of social control, which ranged from paternalism to brutal arbitrariness (Heidemann1992:70-71). The Kangani was<\/em> not a \u201cmediator of conflicts between labour and capital: he was very much the agent of capital and his primary role was to subject labour to the rigorous discipline required by the plantation production system\u201d(Ramasamy1992:99).In contrast to the Kangani<\/em> system of Ceylon, the Kanganis<\/em>inMalaya had less power because the labourers received wages directly from the plantation management (For details see Jain 1993). As compared to the indenture system, the Kangani<\/em> system assumed significance because it ensured a reliable, stable labour supply and smooth functioning of the plantations, given the close ties of ascription and subordination of the labourers due to debt-bondage relationship.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \n

      The labour relationship of Kangani<\/em> was dynamic in nature. Not only was he the recruiter-cum – foreman or overseer of the labourers, but their patron, negotiator, entrepreneur and financier as well. The Kangani<\/em> intervened and took decisions on professional matters of the labourersand mediated in their domestic disputes. The Kangani<\/em>acted as an \u2018inevitable link\u2019 or \u2018intermediary\u2019 between the planters and labourers in the plantation economic structure (Jain 1993:2368) Further, family, kin and caste ties were preserved and respected much more in the Kangani<\/em> system than under indenture (Jain 1988:128). Moreover, since the Kangani<\/em> recruited labourers from his kindred or village folks of his own region,the physical quality of the labourers was satisfactory in contrast to recruitments through theindenture system. Besides, the Kangani<\/em>system resolved the gender imbalance on the plantations as it encouraged family migration.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      In contrast to the Kangani<\/em>system of Ceylon, the Kangani<\/em> system of Malaya was less dependent on the Kangani<\/em>, as the recruitment process was controlled or regulated by the planters through their recruitment firms. Thus theKangani<\/em>had to depend on or coordinate with the recruitment firms.Moreover, the Kangani<\/em>of Malaya was not the centre of the plantation system unlike in Ceylon, because the plantation management in Malaya disbursed wages directly to the labourers. In addition, due to the existence of aplantation bureaucracy, the planters exercised strong control over both the Kangani <\/em>and the labourers. Thus, the position of Kangani<\/em>in Ceylon was more dominant as compared his counterpart inMalaya.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      Maistry <\/em>System in Burma<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      The Maistry<\/em>system was a variant of the Kangani<\/em>system in terms of recruitment and subordination of labourers to meet the growing demands of unskilled labourers for the colonial economy of Burma. The majority of labourers were drawn from the Andhra region of the erstwhile Madras Presidency. The Workmen\u2019s Breach of Contract Act of 1869 and the Labour Act of 1876 encouraged and established the Maistry<\/em>system for labourrecruitment in Burma. The British India Steam Navigation handled the labour traffic between Burma and India.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      The employers in Burma preferred recruiting Indian workers through the Maistries<\/em> as they found this system cheaper and more manageable. The Maistry<\/em>system, unlike the Kangani<\/em>system, was relatively more structured, hierarchically graded and had a well-defined labour relationship wherein the\u00a0\u201cLabour Contractor, the Head <\/span>Maistry<\/em>, the Charge <\/span>Maistry<\/em>and the Gang <\/span>Maistry<\/em> constituted the hierarchy of middlemen employers\u201d (Kondapi1951: 41).<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

       <\/p>\n

      The main characteristic of the Maistry<\/em> system of labour recruitment was the enslavement of labourers to the middlemen-employers due to the debt-bondage system. The recruits were controlled through illegal deductions of wages and its disbursement by middlemen-employers. The system was highly exploitative and coercive. The same wages werepaid for work in the daytime as well as at night. Further, in contrast to the Kangani<\/em> system, under the Maistry<\/em> scheme, the labourers were subservienttothe Maistry<\/em>and not to the factory or rice farm owners.Besides, the position of the Maistry<\/em>was dominant because he had the power to dismiss thelabourers arbitrarily (AdapaSatyanarayana2001:16).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      The Act of 1869 was repealed later as it was very oppressive and aggravated labour relations. The Maistry <\/em>system was finally abolished in 1937 due to the poor safeguards and working conditions that it offered to its labourrecruits(For details see Kondapi 1951; AdapaSatyanarayana 2001).<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      All the three contractual laboursystemsacted as \u2018agency\u2019 for the mass exodus of unskilled labourers, the \u2018coolies\u2019 from India. These mechanisms were cleverly crafted to meet the demands of unskilled labourers in the various parts of the British Empire and ensure theircirculation between India and the Britishcolonies. The predominant role of \u2018middlemen\u2019 or \u2018agents\u2019 in terms of recruitment and the transportation of labour was the notablefeature of these labour recruitment mechanisms. These mechanisms offered an alternative to slavery and extended to the workers limited safeguards to their working conditions (Kuper 1960: 2). Despite all the hardships that the Indian immigrant workers were subjected to, a majority of them stayed on in their countries of adoption. Over the years they have exhibited resilience, and through their hard work and resolve, their descendants haveadapted to the socio- political and economic circumstances in their host contexts. Today, the descendants of these working class emigrants constitute significant ethnic minority communities in their respective countries of adoption were born and grew up in and now consider as their home.<\/p>\n

       <\/p>\n

      REFERENCES\u00a0<\/strong>Books<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

        \n
      • Arasaratnam, S. (1970) Indian in Malaysia and Singapore<\/em>. London: Oxford University Press.<\/li>\n
      • Baker, C. J. (1984)An Indian Rural Economy 1880-1955: The Tamil Nadu Countryside.<\/em> Oxford:Clarendon Press.<\/li>\n
      • Breman, Jan. (1989) Taming the Coolie Beast: Plantation Society and the Colonial Order in\u00a0<\/em>Southeast Asia. <\/em>NewDelhi: Oxford University Press.<\/li>\n
      • Chabbra, HariSharan (1986) India and Africa: a Saga of Friendship<\/em>. New Delhi: Thomas Press Ltd.<\/li>\n
      • Chakravarti, N.R. (1971) The Indian Minority in Burma<\/em> \u2013<\/em> The Rise and Decline of an Immigrant<\/em> Community. <\/em>London: Oxford University Press.<\/li>\n
      • Chattopadhyay, Haraprasad (1970) Indians in Africa.<\/em> Calcutta: Book land Pvt. Ltd.<\/li>\n
      • Clarke, C., et.al. (Eds.) (1990) South Asians Overseas: Migration and Ethnicity.<\/em> Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.<\/li>\n
      • Gangulee, Nagendranath (1947) Indians in the Empire Overseas: A Survey Charles Freer Andrews\u00a0<\/em>Memorial Volume. <\/em>New Delhi: New India Publishing House.<\/li>\n
      • Heidemann, Frank M. (1992) Kanganies in Sri Lanka and Malaysia: Tamil Recruiter-Cum-Foreman\u00a0<\/em>as a Sociological Category in the 19th and 20th Century.<\/em>M\u00fcnchen (AnaconVerlag): Tokyo University of Foreign Studies (mimeographed).<\/li>\n
      • Henning, C.G (1979) The Indentured Indian in Natal.<\/em> New Delhi: Promilla and Co. Publishers.<\/li>\n
      • Hofmeyer, Isabel and Williams, Michelle (ed.) (2011) South Africa and India Shaping the Global<\/em> South. <\/em>South Africa: Wits University Press.<\/li>\n
      • Jain, R. K. (1988) Overseas Indians in Malaysia and the Carribbean: Comparative Notes. In Howard\u00a0Johnson (ed.) After the Crossing.<\/em> London: Frank Cass.<\/li>\n
      • Jain, R. K., (1970) South Indians on the Plantation Frontier in Malaya<\/em>. London: New Haven.<\/li>\n
      • Jayaraman, R. (1975) Caste Continuities in Ceylon: A Study of the Social Structure in Three Tea\u00a0<\/em>Estates. <\/em>Bombay: Popular Prakashan.<\/li>\n
      • Kara, Siddharth (2014) Bonded Labor: Tackling the System of Slavery in South Asia.<\/em> New York:Columbia University Press.<\/li>\n
      • Kondapi, C. (1951) Indian Overseas, 1838-1949.<\/em> New Delhi: Indian Council of World Affairs.<\/li>\n
      • Kuper, Hilda (1960) Indian People in Natal<\/em>. Natal: University Press.<\/li>\n
      • Lal, Brij V. (1983) Girmitiyas: The Origins of the Fiji Indians.<\/em> Canberra: Journal of Pacific History Inc.<\/li>\n
      • Myers H. (1998) Music of Hindu Trinidad: Somgs from the Indian Diaspora.<\/em>Chicago: University of Chicago Press.<\/li>\n
      • Nambi, Arooran. K (1985) Indians in Natal.<\/em> Thanjavur: Tamil University.<\/li>\n
      • Oonk, Gijsbert (2007) Global Indian Diasporas Exploring Trajectories of Migration and<\/em> Theory.<\/em>Netherlands.Amsterdam University Press.International Institute for Asian Studies (IIAS).<\/li>\n
      • Parmer, J. N. (1960) Colonial Policy and Administration: A History of Labour in the Rubber\u00a0\u00a0<\/em>Plantation Industry in Malaya. 1910-1941<\/em>. New York: J. J. August in Inc.<\/li>\n
      • Saha, Panchanan (1970) Emigration of Indian Labour.<\/em> Delhi: People\u2019s Publishing House.<\/li>\n
      • Sandhu, Kernial Singh (1969) Indians in Malaya: Some Aspects of their Immigration and Settlement\u00a0<\/em>(1786-1957). <\/em>London: Cambridge University Press.<\/li>\n
      • Tinker, H. (1974) A New System of Slavery: The Export of Indian Overseas, 1830-1920.<\/em> London:\u00a0Oxford University Press.<\/li>\n
      • Uma DhupeliaMesthrie( 2000) From Cane Fields to Freedom<\/em>. Cape Town: Kwela Books.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
          \n
        1. eetha (2012) \u2018In a faraway sugar cane field: imagining indentured labour in colonial India\u2019 in\u00a0Patel, Sujata and Uys, Tina (eds.) Contemporary India and South Africa<\/em>. UK: Routledge.Vahed.G and Desai.A.(2010) Inside Indian Indenture.<\/em>South Africa: HRSC Press<\/li>\n
        2. Wesumperuma, Dharmapriya (1986) Indian Immigrant Plantation Workers in Sri Lanka: a Historical\u00a0<\/em>Perspective 1880-1910. <\/em>Kelanya (Sri Lanka): Vidyalankara Press.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"menu_order":1,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-21","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry"],"part":3,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/socp11\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/21","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/socp11\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/socp11\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/socp11\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/socp11\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/21\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":452,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/socp11\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/21\/revisions\/452"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/socp11\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/3"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/socp11\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/21\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/socp11\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/socp11\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=21"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/socp11\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=21"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ebooks.inflibnet.ac.in\/socp11\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=21"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}