188th Anniversary of the Arrival of the East Indian Indentured Immigrants in Guyana

Dear Editor,

On the occasion of the arrival of the first batch of East Indian Indentured Immigrants 188 years ago, I would like to pay homage to the women who came on board The Hesperus and The Whitby, which landed in Guyana on May 5th 1838. There were a total of 14 women with 21 children ages 14 and under who disembarked.  All of the women, with the exception of two, and the 21 children were not indentured.

The embarkation list for the Hesperus did not show the names of the women, instead they were shown as wives who accompanied their husbands.   However, on the disembarkation list all five women in addition to a sixth woman were named. Three of the women and their husbands were sent to John and Henry Moss Plantation, Anna Regina and two women and their husbands as well as the sixth woman who apparently travelled alone were sent to John Gladstone, Vreed-en-hoop Plantations.

Names of the women on the Hesperus (their husbands were not identified on the disembarkation list:

Names of the men whose wives accompanied them:

From the above one can observe the discrepancies of the ages of the immigrants on the Hesperus when comparing the embarkation list against the disembarkation list. Going by the information shown on the disembarkation list, a few of the women appeared to be much older than their respective husbands, which was very unusual. It appears as if one set of immigrant boarded the vessel and a totally different set disembarked, many of the immigrants’ names were also misspelled on both ships.

While the women and children were not indentured at least one woman on Gladstone Vreed-en-hoop plantation was working together with the men, she was most likely the woman who travelled alone. Also, on the Hesperus there were apparently two unaccompanied 13-year-old boys (Govind, from Nepal and Pulti or Puttee from Bankura, West Bengal) who were registered as indentured immigrants to Gladstone and were to be paid four rupees per month. Upon disembarkation, those two young boys were shown as ages 17 and 14, respectively. There was also a third boy 15-year-old Kyrooah from Sherghati, Bihar, upon disembarkation he was shown as age 14 and indentured to John and Henry Moss and to be paid four rupees per month.

With regards to the Whitby, seven women were named on the embarkation list together with their husbands, however, the disembarkation list showed eight women got off the ship. Six of the women were sent to Highbury Plantation, Berbice (John Cameron) with their husbands; and two were sent to Bellevue, Demerara (James Matthews), one with her husband and four-year-old son as well as the eighth woman.  With regards to the eighth woman – Sudney – her name was not on the embarkation list and no husband was shown for her either.  She apparently travelled with her daughter Nunneedy (age eight). Shortly after their arrival on Bellevue plantation Nunneedy was brutally raped and murdered. Unfortunately, the rapist(s)/murderer(s) was/were never found.

There were also eight boys between the ages of 14-15; seven of the boys were indentured to John Cameron and were paid six farlings per month, while the eighth boy was indentured to James Matthews and paid four rupees per month. It seemed that these boys also travelled alone since it was not clear that they were accompanied by either their parents or any relative.

The women who accompanied their husbands on the Whitby:

Only Lukeeah and Sudney were shown on the disembarkation list

Of Jeebun and Boodoo’s four children, three of them were girls ages 12, 10 and 7, their fourth child was an infant (the gender was no given). Soon after their arrival on John Cameron Highbury Plantation, one of their fellow jahaji listed as Dummto Ram on the embarkation list (the disembarkation list showed his name as Anunto Ram (who was the head sirdar) age 28 from Cuttack, Orissa, he was married to the oldest daughter of the couple. This trend of marrying off younger girls to much older men continued throughout indentureship and there are still cases today of much older men “marrying” younger girls.

Women in India, for the most part, were/are regarded as property of their fathers, brothers or husbands. During the period of indentureship, when recruiting women, the emigration agent and arkatis had the added responsibility of getting the approval of their husbands or fathers; and only when or if “no one claimed her” then she was allowed to emigrate. Unfortunately, many women were deceived and taken to recruitment depots and shipped off to the British colonies.

In the beginning of indentureship and several years into the system, the ‘recruitment machinery’ in India was set up in a male dominated hierarchical pyramid with the emigration agent at the top and the tentacles of the arkatis and sardars or chokedars spread out at the bottom. This mechanism changed when a few females were ‘hired’ as ‘sadarins’ to try and recruit more women. The extra money that each woman brought in for the sardars and sardarins was the sole motivation for them to employ various forms of trickery and entrapment, including kidnapping of many young girls and women.

The Indian Emigrant, a monthly journal published in Madras, focused primarily on the rampant abuses in the recruitment of female labor.  In 1914, Miss Dudley, a Methodist Missionary (stationed in Fiji for a number of years) and a fierce opponent of the indentureship system penned a letter to the publication which highlighted ways in which many young women and girls were duped into recruitment depots. She claimed that one woman told her that she had quarreled with her husband and in anger tried to run away from her mother-in-law’s house to go back to her mother’s house. On the way a man questioned her and told her that he would show her the way; instead he took her to a recruitment depot. Another woman said her husband went to work away from home and later sent word for her to follow him; on the way a man said he knew her husband and that he would take her to him, she was also taken to a depot.  In another incident, a young girl was asked by her neighbour to accompany her to see the Muharram festival, whilst there she was deceived by a recruiter into going to a depot. Another woman told Miss Dudley that she was on her way to a bathing ghat and on her way she was misled by a woman and taken to a depot. Once the women and young girls arrived at the depot they were told that they cannot go back home until they repay the recruiters for the food and other travel expenses incurred on the way to the depot.   Some may have paid but the majority were unable to do so, those were forced to sign the indentured contract since they had no other choice.

Apparently, it was the general assumption by the white officials in India as well as a number of Christian priests, including Reverend HVP Bronkhurst that all of the single or unattached females who boarded the ships in India were of ill-repute. This was/is very damning and misleading to put such a deceitful label on those girls and women, who for all intents and purposes were very pious and chaste with many of them being willfully misled into signing up to go to a far off land under false promises. Bronkhurst was a member of the Wesleyan Methodist Church and was shipped from India to Guyana to convert the East Indians to the Christian faith.  Ironically Bronkhurst was the son of a Dutch father and a young Tamil woman, it is not certain if the union was consensual.

Also, some of the women who were recruited may have abandoned violent or much older husbands, or fled from poverty after the demise of their husbands and were at the mercy of their in-laws. Those women were adventurous enough to seek a life in an unknown land for themselves and young kid(s).  Also, in other instances, one can only imagine the trauma caused by the deliberate and devious acts perpetuated by the arkatis, which led to several families being broken up due to the women being forced to leave their husbands and kid(s) behind in India to toil in the cane fields in a far off land. (In some cases, men were also tricked into signing a contract thus leaving their wives and children behind).

While there is a voluminous body of work on the indentureship system as a whole, there is a dearth of writings on the overall contribution and impact the presence of the indentured and non-indentured women made on the plantations not only in providing labour in the field, but also in ensuring a level of stability in the family life. They were also the gatekeepers of traditions (especially celebrations surrounding marriage, childbirth and religious festivals). Many of the traditions continued throughout the period of indentureship and some even persisted to this day in Guyana.  For many of the women their work and role on the plantation and in the home were largely overlooked. While, women had no voice or will of their own, the indentured women had little choice but to juggle the quadruple work load of: (1) low-wage field labor; (2) household duties; (3) being a wife; and (4) a mother; the latter three being unpaid labour.

In addition, the women were subjected to sexual and physical abuse (both at the hands of their white Managers/overseers as well as their spouses).  Such abuse oftentimes led to the senseless murder of a number of women at the hands of jealous spouses on suspicion/accusations of infidelity. Despite everything they were forced to endure they persisted in carving out a life for themselves and their family.  Many of the indentured women continued to work even after the expiration of their contract and even today women are engaged not only in field work but in almost all occupations, including doctors, lawyers, engineers and politicians.

I pay my humble tribute and gratitude to those 14 pioneering women who laid the foundation for the rest of the women who came after them.

Sincerely,

Bibi Halima Khanam