Indian Labour In Fiji.

Should It Be Introduced To Other Islands Territories?

Written for the “Pacific Islands Monthly,” by a Fijian Planter.

INDIAN labour for the Solomon Is lands need not be viewed with ap prehension. This might also apply to Samoa, where Chinese are troublesome, and also to other Islands territories, where labour is scarce.

The Hindus are a very adaptable people, and the advantages of having them are considerable.

Fiji can be quoted as a very good example of where the experiment of introduced Indian labour has been a success. Many years ago the Govern ment saw the advisability of introduc ing into Fiji and adequate labour sup ply for all time. The Indians first in troduced were sent to the island of Taviuni in the Leau or Eastern group.

At first, the planters did not take kindly to them, but eventually they be came firmly established.

They were first brought to Fiji under the indenture system. Their term of in denture was usually for a period of five years. After that some of them became free settlers and successful land owners.

Others took up tenancies on small blocks let out by the sugar company for cultivating cane for the mills. While a good number occupy a considerable area of crown leases, others are store keepers, engineers, motor car drivers, etc. —in fact, practically every branch of trade is represented. They are splen did business people.

Think of all the extra revenue they represent in taxes, land rent, customs dues, to say nothing of income tax and residential tax of £1 per head for every male over sixteen in the colony! When one realises that there are about 80,000 Indians in the colony, the revenue is going to benefit considerably.

The introduction of Indian labour to the Solomons and Samoa would solve the labour problem —though it may raise other problems. All intending labour should be subject to strict me dical inspection before embarkation.

The selection of the healthiest would tend to build up a sturdy Indian popu lation which would soon adapt itself to the varying climates and conditions of the Islands.

There need not be a repetition of the errors committed in Fiji. For instance, a reasonable percentage of women should be allowed in. The decision to keep women out was a great mistake in Fiji, where the labour lines became notorious for iniquity. Married couples should be provided with separate quar ters, as is now done in Fiji.

Another early fault of Fiji employers was the engaging of inexperienced men as overseers. Only those experienced in handling Indian labour should be engaged. Much ill-feeling and mis understanding can be avoided by a good knowledge of the language. Over seers and cadets should be drawn from India and Ceylon, or from the ranks of those who have had some experience in the working of Indian labour.

It is useless to indenture high-caste Indians. They do not make good labour and are less inclined to the ways of discipline. I have often heard it said, the fairer the skin the lazier. The dark ones certainly are more energetic.

If you require cheap labour, by all means let them have their store goods at cost price, such as rice, tea, sugar, sharps, curry powder, onions and ghee.

The Indian loves his curry and roti (a kind of pancake made of sharps). The cost of this is deducted from their wages, weekly or monthly, as the case may be.

Indian tenants, or peasant farmers on various plantations, are certainly an asset to the place. Rent is derived from them for the amount of land occupied.

They grow rice, maize and all manner of produce, including vegetables, and they are always available as labour supply if their services are required.

Most plantation-lease agreements have that clause inserted, that they are to work on the owner’s plantation, at a reasonable rate of remuneration, when called upon to do so.

The Indians are a comparatively law abiding race, and I think would excel the Chinese coolie in that respect.

One outstanding feature of the In dians in Fiji is that they have not mixed with the native races to any ap preciative extent. In fact, the percent age is negligible. The two races do not blend. Even when Indian labour was first introduced into Fiji, and Indian women were few, the number of In dians married to native women could be counted on the fingers. Labour of this description would suit Samoa ad mirably, in view of the difficulty with half-caste Chinese.

When I arrived in Fiji in 1917, the Indians were still under the indenture system. The ruling wages were, at that time, women 9d. per day, men 1/- for a twelve-hours day, as far as I can recollect—Saturday half-pay. Men and women worked side by side, on identi cal field work, by the day, or task. If and when a task were finished, they could go home. There was always a rmall percentage who finished later than the others.

On various occasions, notably from about 1921 to 1927, and even years be

fore that. Solomon Islanders, and In dians were indentured to planters in Tonga, the Island Kingdom. The Solo mon Islanders were more successful as labour in Tonga than the Indians.

Solomon Islanders, from the time that they were introduced into Fiji, have been our best labour —very law abiding and obedient. They mix freely with the native races.

The Indians, on the other hand, were less successful in Tonga, due to the fact that planters, storekeepers, etc., did not understand them, or their ways.

Very few of the Indians understand any English and the planters and traders in Tonga knew perhaps as much Hin dustani as the Indians knew of English.

This does not mean to infer that, as they were not a success in Tonga, they will not be elsewhere. There is no reason why they should not be as suc cessful as those introduced to Fiji, pro vided that previous mistakes are not repeated.