Indentured Slavery Essay
Indentured Slavery
In the 17th and 18th centuries, the Americas and Africa saw a shift from slavery and other forms of work to indentured servitude. In many instances, this influx of imported men and women more than doubled the native population. An increasing agricultural necessity and potential, as well as the falling out of slavery caused a drastic increase in the practice of indentured servitude which disrupted native lands and harmed imported workers.
The first justification and need for indentured servitude came in the 1850's when British colonies throughout the world began to experience a labor shortage. From this necessity for workers came Merivale's justification that "[the indentured servants] have been raised" instead of …show more content…
As shown by the Indentured Migration Routes, the vast majority of labor came from the Asian countries of India, China and Japan. Northrup's statistics further prove this idea revealing that more than one million Indians became workers in the Americas and Africa. These incredible numbers of imported workers greatly skewed local population numbers as shown by government population records. In four of the areas six represented, indentured workers made up more than 40% of the total population. These new inhabitants likely destroyed much of the native culture in their efforts to start new lives and placed great strains of the local governments whom they had never come into contact with until this point. Additionally, the British Government's General Statement on Indian Immigration proves that indentured servitude caused great disproportions in the male to female rations of all countries involved. In 1851, almost 5 times as many men as women came to work in Mauritius. These numbers cause not only a new drastically male society, but also lead to a predominately female society in the parent country. In Ramana's letter, he describes horrid working conditions contrasting to the British work contract. While his claim is likely biased, his argument shows that worker conditions in the colonies were not as excellent as the British made them
In the 17th and 18th centuries, the Americas and Africa saw a shift from slavery and other forms of work to indentured servitude. In many instances, this influx of imported men and women more than doubled the native population. An increasing agricultural necessity and potential, as well as the falling out of slavery caused a drastic increase in the practice of indentured servitude which disrupted native lands and harmed imported workers.
The first justification and need for indentured servitude came in the 1850's when British colonies throughout the world began to experience a labor shortage. From this necessity for workers came Merivale's justification that "[the indentured servants] have been raised" instead of …show more content…
As shown by the Indentured Migration Routes, the vast majority of labor came from the Asian countries of India, China and Japan. Northrup's statistics further prove this idea revealing that more than one million Indians became workers in the Americas and Africa. These incredible numbers of imported workers greatly skewed local population numbers as shown by government population records. In four of the areas six represented, indentured workers made up more than 40% of the total population. These new inhabitants likely destroyed much of the native culture in their efforts to start new lives and placed great strains of the local governments whom they had never come into contact with until this point. Additionally, the British Government's General Statement on Indian Immigration proves that indentured servitude caused great disproportions in the male to female rations of all countries involved. In 1851, almost 5 times as many men as women came to work in Mauritius. These numbers cause not only a new drastically male society, but also lead to a predominately female society in the parent country. In Ramana's letter, he describes horrid working conditions contrasting to the British work contract. While his claim is likely biased, his argument shows that worker conditions in the colonies were not as excellent as the British made them