MAURITIUS. 2. In reply, I am commanded to state, for the information of the Board of Commissioners, that the above enactment seems to the Court, as at present informed, sufficiently to meet the requirements of the case; and that they are not aware of any reason why the Ordinance should not be submitted for the confirmation of Her Majesty. 3. The Court observe with much gratification, that before the receipt of the letter of Mr. Secretary Labouchere, communicating the representations of the Court arising out of the cases of the ships "St Germain " and " Glaneur," it had been the intention of the Government of the Mauritius to propose to the Colonial Legislature a measure for preventing the immigration of Indian labourers in any other way than through the agency established under the authority of the Indian Legislature. The Secretary India Board. I have, &c. (signed) James C. Melvill. Sub-Enclosure. 31 Dec. 1857. Sir. India Board, 8 January 1858. A copy of your letter of the 21st November last, with the Ordinance proposed by the Legislature of Mauritius to prevent the illegal introduction of coolies into that Colony, having been forwarded by the Commissioners for the Affairs of India for the opinion of the Court of Directors, I have now the honour to enclose to you a copy of the letter which they have received from Sir James Melvill, containing the sentiments of the Court upon the subject. H. Merivale, Esq. &c. &c. &c. I am, &c. (signed) George Clerk. No. 16. Right Hon. H. Labouchere, M.P. to Governor Stevenson. 27 January 1858. Page 278. 16 January 1858. Enclosure 1. 27 January 1858. Enclosure 2. Encl. 1, in No. 16. Sub-Enclosure. COPY of a DESPATCH from the Right Honourable H. Labouchere, M.P. to Governor Stevenson. Sir, Downing-street, 27 January 1858. WITH reference to my Despatch of the 7th August last, No. 3,* I transmit to you for your information copy of a further correspondence with Mr. Macpherson on the subject of immigration into Mauritius. I have, &c. (signed) H. Labouchere. Enclosure 1, in No. 16. To the Right Honourable Henry Labouchere, Secretary of State for the Colonies. Sir, London, 16 January 1858. I HAD the honour of addressing you on the 15th June and 15th July last to request, on behalf of the Mauritius planters, that you be pleased to sanction certain changes in the laws respecting contracts with coolie and other labourers in that Colony. I beg leave to send you herewith copy of a letter from the Chamber of Agriculture there, expressive of its entire concurrence in my representations to you upon the subject, and requesting me to seek an opportunity of again bringing before you the urgency with which these changes are hoped for by all those interested in agriculture in the island." We seek for no compulsory engagement; the Protector of Immigrants and the magistrates are on the spot, they take cognizance of all the details of the contracts, and are always ready to protect the immigrants in their free choice of employers. All we ask is, that the planters and labourers should be allowed to form a mutual engagement for five years, a measure that would afford the planters an opportunity of obtaining that regular and continuous labour so essential to tropical agriculture, whilst it would tend more than anything else (by freeing them from the baneful influence of those Indian crimps who make their livelihood by deceit and lies) to lead the Indian into more settled and industrious habits, and to promote those feelings of mutual interest between employers and employed which never fail to be of material benefit to both. The addresses to both the late and present Governor show the importance which planters attach to this measure, and I do hope you will give it a full and fair investigation, which the presence here of Sir James Higginson, our late Governor, and of General Hay, our late Acting Governor, will enable you to do in a most satisfactory manner. I may add that if we are allowed to bring a sufficient number of labourers to the island, with the power of securing their services for five years, large tracts of land now laying waste would be brought into cultivation, and within a given time the production of the island might be doubled. Lane's Hotel, St. Alban's-place, S.W. Monsieur et cher Collegue, Sub-Enclosure. A Monsieur Alex. Macpherson. Port Louis, Chambre d'Agriculture, J'AI eu le plaisir de soumetre à la Chambre d'Agriculture à sa séance du 17 Sept. dernier la lettre que vous m'avez fait l'honneur de m'écrire le 4 Juillet. La Chambre partage entièrement votre opinion relativement à la nécessité de prolonger à cinq années les contrats de service de travailleurs à Maurice, et de rendre valables les engagemens contractés dans l'Inde, et vous félicite d'avoir présenté ces questions au très Honorable Secretaire d'Etat sous un jour si vrai et si frappant. Un vote unanime de remercimens à été passé par la Chambre après la lecture de votre lettre et du mémoire que vous avez adressé au Ministre des Colonies, et j'ai été chargé de vous transmettre en même temps que l'expression de la reconnaissance de mes confrès, les vœux qu'ils font pour qu'il vous soit possible de continuer vos bons offices à la Chambre et à la Colonie pendant votre séjour en Europe. C'est une tache qu'il m'est doux de remplir, et je vous prie, mon cher collégue, de croire à la sincerité des sentimens de votre bien dévoué. (signed) J. Currie, President de la Chambre d'Agriculture. Sir, Enclosure 2, in No. 16. Downing-street 27 January 1858. I AM directed by Mr. Secretary Labouchere to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 16th instant, and to acquaint you, in reply, that any representation which the Mauritius Chamber of Agriculture may be desirous of making to Her Majesty's Government on the subject of immigration into that island should, in accordance with the colonial regulations, be made through the Governor. MAURITIUS. Encl. 2, in No. 16. (No. 74.) COPY of a DESPATCH from the Right Honourable the Lord Stanley, M.P. to Governor Stevenson. Sir, Downing-street, 4 June 1858. I HAVE the honour to inform you that I have come to the conclusion that it will be advisable that the services of the existing agents for collecting emigrants at Calcutta and Madras should hereafter be confined to the Mauritius, and that the West Indian Colonies should have a distinct agency of their own. Until such officers can be obtained and reach the scene of their duties the present agents will continue to act for the West Indian Colonies by which they are now employed, and their salaries on account of those Colonies will be payable until they are relieved. The adoption of the present decision will put an end to the idea of keeping up a division of seasons between the Mauritius and the West Indies. India will be open throughout the year to the agents of all the Colonies concerned to do their best for the advancement of the service on which they are employed, with the exception only, so far as regards the West Indies, of a period during which sanitary considerations render it unfit that coolies should be despatched so as to pass the Cape of Good Hope in the cold weather. I have every reason to hope from what I see on record that the present measure will be acceptable to the colony of Mauritius, whilst the separation of the agencies has also been frequently requested by different Governments in the West Indies. I have &c. No. 17. 4 June 1858. 17 May 1858. Enclosure 1. 19 June 1858. Enclosure 2. 16 July 1858. Enclosure 3. Encl. 1, in No. 18. COPY of a DESPATCH from the Right Honourable Sir E. B. Lytton, Bart., M.p. to Governor Stevenson. Sir, Downing-street, 26 July 1858. I HAVE to acknowledge the receipt of your Despatch of the 30th January last, No. 22,* having reference to the immigration of coolies from India, under the Mauritius Ordinance, No. 22, of 1857, and more especially to the question of giving validity to contracts made in India previous to embarkation. I transmit to you, for your information and guidance, copies of the correspondence noted in the margin. These letters will put you in full possession of the views of Her Majesty's Government on the several measures you have suggested. I have, &c. E. B. Lytton. Sir, (signed) Enclosure 1, in No. 18. Emigration Office, 17 May 1858. WE have to acknowledge your letter of the 21st ultimo, enclosing a Despatch from the Governor of Mauritius, respecting emigration from India into that island. 2. In his Despatch, No. 53, of 17th of October, Mr. Labouchere requested the Governor to send to England a report from the Protector of Immigrants, respecting the system of employing recruiters, and its consequences, on which the Ordinance No. 22 of 1857 had been founded, but which had not been forwarded with that Ordinance. The report is now forwarded, and the Governor takes the opportunity of stating his intention to consolidate the Immigration Law, and of submitting to the Secretary of State the propriety of certain alterations in it. 3. The consolidation of the law is certainly very much to be desired. It consists at present of a large number of Ordinances, mostly very short, which have been passed during the last six years, to modify, repeal, and re-enact each other, and must form a most troublesome code to administer. 4. The proposed alterations appear to be suggested in their main features by the Chambers of Agriculture and Commerce, in order to remove certain practical difficulties which are experienced by the planters and the Protector of Immigrants in the conduct of the immigration. They concern, first, the mode of distributing the immigrants; secondly, the period for which they are to be indentured in the Colony. 5. The rules of allotting immigrants are laid down in the Ordinances No. 15 of 1854, No. 12 of 1855, and No. 22 of 1857. 6. No. 15 provided that the immigration of each year should be divided among the planters in proportion to the produce of their estates, but subject to the condition (contained in the 6th and 7th clauses of the Ordinance) that those who desired an extra share of the Government immigration might obtain it by paying 37. additional for each extra immigrant allotted to them. 7. No. 12 of 1855 provided, that extra labourers might also be procured by paying the full cost of introduction. These labourers were supposed to be introduced not as part of, but in addition to, the Government quota. 8. No. 22 of 1857 repealed the 6th and 7th clauses of No. 15, and so left the introduction of extra immigrants to be effected under No. 12 of 1855 only. 9. It appears, however, that this system does not work entirely well. The fertility of Mauritius leading, first, to an extended cultivation, then to an increased necessity for hands to support that cultivation, and so to a keen competition for labour among the planters, who are pressing forward to avail themselves to the utmost of the natural advantages of their property, makes it worth while for sugar planters not only to pay the cost of introducing immigrants, but also to send out native recruiters to collect emigrants in India each for his own employer. And these recruiters find it worth while, instead of engaging themselves honestly in the work of collection, to seduce (as it is fairly called) into their employer's service immigrants who have been collected by the Government, or by other men's recruiters. The present law requires every immigrant to land in Mauritius at liberty to choose his own employer. While, therefore, the coolies are on board the emigrant ship, or in depôt at Calcutta or Mauritius, they are open to the influence of the rival Sirdars (as they are called), who struggle for the power of directing their choice of an employer, and, when they have obtained this, use it of course (not without much unseemly quarrelling) for the purpose of making their own profit both out of the planter and out of the coolie. 10. The 10. The effect is said to be that men of substance send out bonâ fide recruiters, in order MAURITIUS. to secure to themselves a supply of labour adequate to carry out the operations they have commenced; but that this supply is intercepted by the agents of more needy and less fairdealing persons, who are only bound by the present law to pay the real importer the expenses he has incurred in the collection of his people, with an addition of 25 per cent., a wholly inadequate compensation for the disappointment of his expectations. 11. To obviate these difficulties (besides endeavouring to increase the rate of immigration), Governor Stevenson proposes that Indians shall be allowed, under proper precautions, to make binding contracts in India, either with a particular person, or with the Government, and that on their arrival in the Colony they shall be bound, as a matter of course, in the first case to the person they have contracted to serve; in the second, to the person to whom the Government shall allot them. 12. The former of these principles, that of private contract, has been admitted in the case of the proposed emigration from Bombay to the West Indies. The latter, that of Government allotment, is that on which, practically, the West Indian emigration has been hitherto carried We imagine, therefore, there can be no objection to admit either with regard to Mauritius. The conditions by which Mr. Stevenson proposes to secure that they shall not be applied to the substantial disadvantage of the immigrants are contained in the 42d and following paragraphs of his Despatch, and are in substance as follows: (1.) All applications for extra immigrants to be made to the Protector in Mauritius, or the emigration agent in India, specifying the number of people required, and the wages and other advantages which the labourers are to receive. The Protector to send to the emigration agent a periodical report of the minimum and maximum amount of wages and rations given in different localities, and for different kinds of work. (2.) All emigrants to pass through the immigration depôt. The Government agent so to exercise a certain restraint over the operations of the private agents employed in the selection or engagement of labourers, and to secure that these latter are fully informed of all that they ought to know. The contract to be always made before the emigration agent or "magisterial authority sanctioned by Government." (3.) A copy to be given to the immigrant of the contract; which is to be indefeasible, except of course by consent of the employer or in consequence of his misconduct, and then only through a stipendiary magistrate. Persons persuading the coolies (even on shipboard) to escape from their engagement, to be punishable. (4.) The association of Indians under a sirdar of their own village (who is distinguishable from the crimp who bears the same title), to be encouraged; and any such association to be allotted, as far as possible, to the same employer. (5.) Immigrants under special engagement to be sent "if practicable" in separate ships, or in ships provided by their employers. ments. (6.) Immigrants to choose in the depôt at Calcutta between special and general engageIf they choose the latter, to be allotted at the discretion of the Mauritius Government, with a reasonable allowance for their own preference of an employer. A sirdar to be punished for asking, and an employer for giving to him, "anything beyond the fair stipulated wages or improved rations allowed to be paid to the sirdar for his special services." 13. These regulations appear to us to be in the main well-considered and sufficient. few remarks, however, occur to us on matters not affecting their principles. (1.) We do not see why applications should be allowed to the emigration agent in India. It appears to us much safer and better that they should be all given in to the protector, and by him forwarded to the emigration agent, with such information and instructions as his knowledge of the applicants and circumstances of the Colony would enable him to give. 66 a (2.) The second rule is most necessary. But it appears to us it must be carried farther. The Indian Government will not allow the employment of private collecting agents. Every such agent, though acting in fact for an individual, should not only be subjected to certain restraint" on the part of the Emigration Agent, but should be distinctly a subordinate to that officer, and should act only in virtue of a licence from him, revocable in case of misconduct. The contract should be made before the emigration agent, or officer acting in that capacity, and perhaps should be made at once on the emigrant's arrival in the Calcutta or Madras depôts, otherwise the effect of the change may merely be to transfer the bidding for labour from the Mauritius depôt to the establishments in India. (3.) Copies of the contracts of immigrants with private persons will, of course, be sent to the Protector of Immigrants at Mauritius, in the ship which carries the contracting labourer. Such contracts should always be made in a form prescribed by law, on pain of being annulled by the Protector. (4.) We do not see that the Mauritius Legislature could affix a criminal character to acts committed at sea. This has been more than once decided by the law officer of the Crown. (5.) Our own experience would lead us to apprehend that the endeavour to send different classes of emigrants in different ships, and still more the allowing individuals to supply MAURITIUS. ships for certain of the emigrants passing through the Government depôt, might embarrass the Emigration Agent, who is generally chargeable with the duty of apportioning the supply of ships to the supply of emigrants. We would strongly recommend that neither of these rules should be adopted, unless the Government Agents are of opinion that they can be carried into effect without inconvenience. (6.) In carrying out this regulation, we are inclined to think it would be advisable that every immigrant should, in the presence of the emigration agent in India, sign his name or mark either to a distinct contract binding him specially to serve a particular person, or to a contract binding him generally to serve such employer as may be chosen for him by the Government. This will secure that he understands clearly the terms on which he emigrates-a point of peculiar importance where a change of system is contemplated. 14. We should doubt the policy of punishing sirdars or their employers for giving or receiving high wages. Such legislation is, we imagine, generally both oppressive and nugatory. The object should be not to punish, but to remove the opportunity for transactions of this kind, and this the proposed changes seem calculated to effect. If this plan is ineffective, we should apprehend that penal enactments would be still more so. 15. Subject to these observations, we see no reason against the adoption of Mr. Stevenson's plan with regard to the allotment of coolies. 16. With regard to the period of service, he proposes that the coolie should be at liberty, if he chooses, to contract an engagement for five years, determinable at the expiration of the third or fourth year, on payment of a certain proportion of the expenses. 17. This, as Lord Stanley is aware, is very nearly the system which prevails in the West Indies, where the immigrant, during his five years of industrial residence, is only allowed to quit the master to whom he is originally allotted, on condition either of paying a certain sum or transferring himself to another employer; and in the latter case the second employer may be required to contribute towards the cost of introduction, in the same proportion as the first employer has been required to contribute. When the cost of introduction has been in the first instance defrayed by the first employer, the result of this principle would be to require (whether through the evidence of a Government officer or otherwise) a payment from the second employer to the first. 18. Generally speaking, there can of course be no objection to the adoption of these principles in Mauritius. 19. But two circumstances should be observed as peculiar to the latter Colony. First, the cost of introduction is very small; the freights from Calcutta averaged, as far as we can ascertain— In 1854 In 1856 £. s. d. 6 3 2 per adult. Probably the whole average expense for the three years, including the cost of collection, was not more than 6 l. per adult. In the West Indies the cost is more than 14 l., and the employer in British Guiana is required to pay 107. Secondly, we observe that the rate at which new immigrants are indentured for their first three years is considerably less than the average rate of wages. In the West Indies, on the contrary, the immigrant receives the current rate of wages from the moment of his arrival. 20. If the agreement between the importer and the labourer be considered as in substance resting on the principle that the immigrant is entitled to the current wages, while the importer is entitled to deduct from those wages the cost of introduction (and certainly no view would be admissible which was more unfavourable to the immigrant), the above circumstances should be borne in mind in reduction of the employers' claim. 21. With regard to the low rate of wages, indeed, it may be said that the immigrant is at first comparatively unserviceable; and with regard to the cost of importation, that in this cost should be reckoned the expense of introducing women, children, and other persons who, from sickness, deaths, or otherwise, become useless before they have worked out their passage. But with every fair allowance on these accounts, the payment which may justly be considered as due from the immigrant after he has completed his three years' indenture cannot be very large. 22. Perhaps the rate of redemption already sanctioned, 17. 12s. per annum (Ordinance 21 of 1854, s. 1), would not be in itself unreasonable. But we would strongly urge the expediency of a simple arrangement, and one which, after three years of indentured service, would place the immigrant, introduced under private contract, on the same footing which the Government emigrant is to occupy at the expiration of that period. 23. We are aware of no objection to Mr. Stevenson's proposal, that immigrants should be introduced under contract to work for Government or for persons engaged in any mechanical art; subject to the obvious qualification, that the occupation be one for which the coolies are by habit fitted, and to which they do not object. Herman Merivale, Esq. &c. &c. &c. We have, &c. (signed) T. W. C. Murdoch. Frederic Rogers. |