This article is based on the Apprenticeship Period during the years 1834-1838 and focuses on the evidence that showed the links between Slavery and Apprenticeship. Their shocking similarities and the atrocities of the Apprenticeship System are highlighted and established the Apprenticeship System may have been an extension of slavery under a different term. The features of the Apprenticeship System are brought to light and examined, displaying its striking similarities to Slavery.
Slavery is a major blemish on the discourse of human history, yet is the cornerstone of many successful countries in the world. Slavery is the act of capturing a man and controlling him with measures of force. During the course of the years, when slavery was beginning to be resented by some of the fair-minded Whites, the movement for the end of slavery began. This movement ended with the beginning of the Apprenticeship period.
What is the Apprenticeship system?
After the abolition of Slavery in 1834, a new system was introduced, called the Apprenticeship System. This was a system through which the freed slaves had to work on the plantations of their ex-masters, as apprentices. This system lasted between the years 1834-1838. The system was implemented in Guyana, the Caribbean countries with the exception of Antigua and Barbuda. The Apprenticeship System was intended as a transitory state for the blacks from slavery to free men and women. After slavery was abolished, the plantation owners would have suffered a loss if they were not compensated for the loss of their labour force. Hence, the British Empire compensated the planters by giving them a price for each slave. In 1838, slavery, which was prolonged in the form of apprenticeship, was officially ended.
Why did the Planters want the Apprenticeship System implemented?
An argument of the system was that a now freed slave would have had difficulty managing their resources because they were never really quite in charge of their own life before. This is true to the fact the ex-slave would have been limited in a way of still being mistreated and frowned upon. The resources of the ex-slaves were limited because work, shelter and basic necessities were still provided by the planters, like in the years of slavery. The sugar plantations were the sole reliable available source of labour available at this time, so the ex-slaves would have had to continue working on the plantations’ there was little option. Without the ex-slaves who worked on the sugar plantations, the industry would have likely collapsed because they were the most important individuals in the sugar industry; a business without input like labour, is bound to go bankrupt. In addition, the planters would face tremendous losses due to this.
Features of the Apprenticeship System
The main reason for the Apprenticeship System was to make the thought of Emancipation a more possible venture, by allowing the planters a few more years of ‘free labour’. This was considered free labour because the ex-slaves were poorly paid. This was leaning towards the benefits of the planters by having the slaves work for them again. It was an opportunity for the planters to continue gaining more profits. This knowledge leads to the question of whether or not the Apprenticeship System was simply another means of tricking the ex-slaves into thinking they were free. The features of Apprenticeship are quite similar to slavery; the treatment of the apprentices was atrocious and they were no better off than being slaves. Some of the features were:
- Children under six years of age were immediately freed, and if a child or his or her mother was poor, he or she would have had to be an apprentice until the age of twenty one.
This was a mere strategy which was used in order for the planters to have a continuous labour force. Its purpose might have been to assist the children and the ex-slaves but the planters had the bigger end of this bargain. This was so because most of the slaves were very poor and had to agree to this, thus the planters having a steady labour force for a few more years.
On the contrary, a child born of a slave mother in the slavery period was classified as a slave owned by the mother’s master. When the child is old enough, he or she would have been sentenced to work for the master until or if he is sold or dies. Whereas this was normal in slavery, in apprenticeship, the child/children under six were immediately freed but would have had to be an apprentice until the age of twenty-one. After this, perhaps the apprentice would have to continue working on the plantations because it was the most reliable form of labour available then. In other words, the ex-slaves would have had to endure the task of being a labourer on the plantation, whether they desired it or not, just as in the time of slavery.
- A domestic slave had to work for four more years, and a field slave, six.
Your period of apprenticeship was according to your previous stature as noted above. This is believed to be a strategy because the years of a field slave’s apprenticeship are longer than that of a domestic’s. The field slaves are more important than domestics as they are the ones working hard out on the field to produce sugar. Domestics are easily replaceable, rather than the field slaves, because not many of them would have been willing to work on sugar plantations again.
3. The apprentice was to be paid a quarter of their working week.
This is another feature of the Apprenticeship System that was unfair to the blacks. The apprentice works the week and is paid only a quarter (1/4) of what he or she is supposed to be paid. The planter benefits from this because he gets three quarters (3/4) of the apprentice’s income. This was not fair to the ex-slaves because they worked and the planters reap the benefits of the ex-slaves labour. In addition, the “apprentice” could have bought his or her freedom with the money he or she had saved. Purchasing your own freedom is an act of the enslaved; an apprentice should have not had to purchase his or her freedom because they were not owned by the planters. Had the apprentice truly been free, there would have been no need for the purchasing of freedom.
The Role of Stipendiary Magistrates
Stipendiary Magistrates were persons who were appointed in the Caribbean during the Apprenticeship Period to oversee the peace between the slaves and planters during the Apprenticeship System. Their duties were to maintain a balance and provide justice to the slave or planters. Most of these men were fair in their judgments but since there was a small amount of them, they were unable to ensure that the slaves got justice at all times.
On the other hand, some were quite treacherous and sided with the planters against the slaves. The planters sometimes would go to such extents to flatter and bribe the Stipendary Magistrates. In some cases when the Stipendiary Magistrate agrees with the apprentices, some of the planters who were in the wrong would find ways and means of disturbing and preventing the magistrate to do his job.
This was supported by the quote of Mr. Colthurst, “To charm and flatter a man on his arrival, and laud him to the skies, is a common practice, but the moment they find him not purely their own, they lose no opportunity of annoying him in every possible way.”
Through the means of bribery, a planter could have gotten a treacherous Stipendiary Magistrate to do what the planter desired relating to the punishment of the apprentices. This was also quite similar to slavery as the planter could have bribed the person who was in charge as some have done during the slavery period. This is another addition to the contributing factors of the Apprenticeship System being another scheme for the continuation of slavery.
So you see, this aspect of the Apprenticeship system was little or none at all beneficiary to the ex-slaves- it was just like in the days of slavery. Although the Stipendiary magistrates were empowered, they proved little, amounting to no great assistance to most of the ex-slave population.
What happened to the Ex-slaves who Refused to Work?
Apprentices who refused to work were handed over to the jurisdiction of the local magistrates, who, being generally local planters, often vented their dislike of the Apprenticeship System and the end of slavery by imposing harsh punishments, such as flogging. A new harsh form of punishment was also introduced during this period, namely the Treadmill. In this punishment, an ex-slave was strapped to a high bar by his/her wrists. By continuously treading on the steps, an ex-slave’s legs worked a rotating drum. If he/she pauses their shins would be injured by a painful hit.
The Treadmill was just another form of punishment that the ex-slaves were given that revolted anyone who hadn’t endured it. The juries used this degrading punishment for the ex-slave to be taught a lesson. Ex-slaves who went through this punishment, in some cases were not convicted of being guilty, yet went through with the punishment. The Treadmill punishment was quite unfair and is linked to slavery as the harsh punishments were not changed for the apprentice.
Failure of the Apprenticeship System
A Poster calling for the end of the Apprenticeship System – Image Source: http://www.recoveredhistories.org/storiesabolition.php
In the end, the Apprenticeship system was a failure due to the fact that the planters still treated the Blacks as slaves and the Blacks themselves did not want to continue working for the planters. The Apprenticeship system was proven at a later date to be the same as slavery. Neither the apprentices nor the planters were comforted by apprenticeship. The apprentices wanted complete freedom due to the system being unfair. The slaves were mistreated by the planters and were underpaid. The Blacks wanted their freedom and the planters wanted their slaves.
There were many quarrels and the continued ill-treatment of the Negroes caused the British people to petition the Government for an investigation of the Apprenticeship System. They found that the system was not working towards the benefits of the ex-slaves; they were mistreated and quite underpaid, contributing to the fact they had no love for the system. The Apprenticeship System was officially ended in 1838 when it was proven to be a failure.
Conclusion
The Apprenticeship System was one of inconsolability and resent by the apprentices for the planters as well as the system. Some of the features of Apprenticeship were basically terms of slavery that were re-envisioned to an extent, where they could have been classified as slavery on a lesser degree. The general principle of Emancipation was present but the laws were left to be carried out by the colonial legislatures. Some of the appointed Stipendiary Magistrates even accepted bribes from the planters who wanted to evade the consequences of mistreating their apprentice. Some, however, were rather fair in their judgments and tried to support the apprentices when they were in the right.
The planters desired a few more years of free labour and the Apprenticeship System provided them with a way of having this. The Apprenticeship Period was said to be a system of aid to the ex-slaves; to help them overcome their difficulties of being a free individual but it was not. The purpose of the Apprenticeship System was defeated and by 1838, the Apprenticeship Period had been ended due to its weaknesses and its failed purpose. The Apprenticeship System was later determined as slavery that was being conducted under another term.
Article References
- http://www.guyana.org/features/guyanastory/chapter46.html
- Augier, F.R. The Making of the West Indies, Great Britain: Lowe and Brydone Ltd., 1960.
- Greenwood, Robert and Hamber Shirley, Emancipation to Emigration. Thailand: Mac Millian Caribbean,2003
- Kanarick, Yvette Taylor. Caribbean History: Core Course for CSec, Caribbean Educational Publishers.
- Colthurst, Bowen John. The Colthurst Journal, KTO Press, 1977.
- Smith, Sydney. The Works of the Rev. Sydney Smith, Volume 2.
- https://books.google.gy/books?id=nDdIAAAAYAAJ&dq=the+Colthurst+Journal&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=apprenticeship
