Slavery and Indentureship can be described as two of the most horrible historic happenings to occur.

They share numerous differences as well as similarities, which makes us question whether Indentureship was disguised as a form of slavery or not. Chattel slavery, otherwise known as traditional slavery is a system under which people are treated as property and are forced to work. Slaves could be
held against their will from the time of their capture, purchase or birth, and deprived of the right to leave, to refuse to work, or to demand compensation. In some historical situations it has been legal for owners to kill slaves. The conditions in which the slaves resided and worked can be described as horrible.

Indentureship, on the other hand, specifically East Indian Indentureship, was the arrival of East Indians from India to the Caribbean to replace African labor under a contract which they open-mindedly agreed to. In theory, as described by some historical references and using the previously stated definitions it can be stated that Indian Indentureship in the British Colonized Caribbean between 1845 -1917 was not a form of chattel slavery but the conditions however were reminiscent of the past system of slavery which it succeeded as a means of labour. One of the major aspects which differentiated slavery form Indentureship was the legal ownership of the workers involved. Africans were captured from their native homelands and forcefully enslaved via five ways, as prisoners of war, payment of debt, victims of kidnappings and raids, as gifts given to tribal owners and European slave traders alike and through birth. This meant that the human beings being enslaved for their whole lives were legal properties of the humans and their generations enslaving them, comparative to the ownership of animals. When immigrants landed in a Caribbean colony they came under the control of the local immigration department which was headed by a protector of immigrants called the Agent-General.1 Indentured laborers were not by law the property of their employer. Between indentured laborer and plantation owner was the existence of an employer-employee relationship. Their children were in no way bonded by the contracts signed between parent and employer. The contracts ran usually from 3-5 years and could be renewed later for 5-10 years. The contracts were voluntarily signed but however the circumstances surrounding the signings were not always truthful. Some Indians were fooled or misled and there was miscommunication because of the different tribal tongues. The contracts signed in some cases were misrepresentations of the true situation in the British colonies. They were misled and received not what they bargained for; this was partly due to their illiteracy. Some Indians may also have been kidnapped form the poorer areas.
Both the East Indian Indenturers and the enslaved Africans were shipped from their home lands to various European colonies. They are comparable in that many East Indians were kidnapped and taken against their will just as the enslaved Africans were. Nevertheless, the lengthy journeys these two groups of people embarked on contrasted significantly in terms of treatment and conditions. For instance, East Indian Indenturers had agents that tried to make certain that the ship had ample crew, sufficient medical personnel, sweepers, cooks and also, they ensured that the crew looked after the welfare of the indenturers2. Also, planters paid much attention to the medical well-being of the emigrants and supplied accommodation and entertainment to make the extensive voyage more endurable for them. On the other hand, the enslaved Africans were crammed onto large ships by the hundreds and the male slaves were
1 2

William Claypole & John Robottom. Caribbean Story Book 1.Pg 190 Hilary McD Beckles & Verene A.Shepherd.Freedoms Won:Emancipations,Ethnicities and Nationhood. Pg 63

chained together in pairs with the right leg to the next man's left leg to save space. They were fed one meal with water per day and in the scarcity of food, the crew members would have first preference to eat what little it had, leaving the slaves without any. Unlike the East Indian Indenturers,slaves rebelled against the crew members in a number of ways and as a result suffered dreadful consequences. The most common was by refusing to eat or attempting suicide by jumping overboard. When these enslaved Africans attempted and failed to secure their freedom, they were punished with extremely gruesome punishments which included cutting off the limbs of captives in full sight of other slaves, and allowing them to bleed to death.3 Some slaves were also by hung by their feet and whipped to death. This, together with the fact that slavers often threw slaves overboard, and exposure to an assortment of diseases which included outbreaks of yellow fever, dysentery, small pox and scurvy, provided the great number of death rates of the Africans. On arriving at their destinations, the East Indian Indenturers were subject to the same unsanitary living conditions as the slaves and as a result suffered from a number of diseases such as malaria, hookworm and ground itch.4 They were even housed in the same barrack ranges which are a long building divided into rooms of 120 square foot each with a four foot wide covered verandah as the slaves were housed before them. The barrack ranges were often referred to as the Nigger Yard but on the arrival of the East Indians, the barrack ranges were then known as The Bound Yard because the Indentured labourers were now bound.The buildings had dirt floors which often turned into mud due to shoddy housing and roofs. East Indian Indenturers were seen as labouring bodies and nothing else, according to historian Brinsley Samaroo.This is quite similar to the way in which the enslaved Africans were seen as objects to be used and not humans. On the contrary, the enslaved Africans were properties of slave owners while the labour of the East Indian Indenturers,under the law, was purchased and the labourer himself or herself did not belong to the plantation owners. The East Indian Indenturers were also compelled to do arduous, dangerous and degrading tasks such as working on the plantations, harvesting crops, digging ditches and performing repairs that were required on the plantation or homes, just as the slaves had to do. However, the tasks done by the enslaved Africans slightly exceeded the demand and harshness of the tasks that the East Indian Indenturers were obligated to do. This was due to the fact that the Indenturers had to work for nine hours a day, six days a week, while it was mandatory that the enslaved Africans work from dawn till dusk, at least 18 hours a day with one day in the week to rest. They had infrequent rest days and could work for even longer periods of time in the cane-harvesting season. Both the East Indian Indentures and the enslaved Africans did the work that was requested of them under tremendously harsh conditions and were often severely beaten or killed for minor offences or if these tasks were not done the way that was requested of them. Some of the most common punishments they both endured were flogging and whipping. Others included food deviation and dismemberment of the body. The East Indians however were fortunate to gain wages such as two shillings, one pence a day, sometimes more in Trinidad and between one shilling, four pence and two shillings per day in Guyana for the work they did.5 Although, wages were cut and wage rates in the Caribbean hardly moved

3 4

Hilary McD Beckles & Verene A.Shepherd. Liberties Lost:Caribbean Indeginous Societies and Slave Systems.pg 94 Hilary McD Beckles & Verene A.Shepherd.Freedoms Won:Emancipations,Ethnicities and Nationhood. Pg 64 5 Hilary McD Beckles & Verene A.Shepherd.Freedoms Won:Emancipations,Ethnicities and Nationhood. Pg 65

for a year, they were still able to receive money, and this is more than can be said for the enslaved Africans who received nothing for their ruthless toiling in the hot sun. Indenturehip and slavery had their many parallels but they also shared many significant differences. The differences listed in the above paragraph are from reliable historical resources and these differences are what separate Indentureship from slavery. The parallels however exists in the conditions which both sections of labourers faced .The conditions the Indentured labourers faced was reminiscent of slavery in that the time frame between emancipation and immigration was short and allowed for little or no improvement to be made in facilities and change in attitudes towards persons of different races. It is pragmatic to see the mistake some may make but in conducting the above research, I can successfully conclude that Indentureship was not a new form of slavery.