Popular in History

Arts and Humanities

Titus Quinctius Flamininus’ “Italian triumph”

McGill University Michael Fronda

Arts and Humanities

Lincoln and the Jews

Brandeis University Jonathan Sarna

Arts and Humanities

Early Modern Natural Law Theories

University of Copenhagen Knud Haakonssen

Arts and Humanities

Phoenicians Among Others: Why Migrants Mattered in the Ancient Mediterranean

University of California San Diego Denise Demetriou

Arts and Humanities

The loneliness of leadership

University of Liverpool Elaine Chalus

Arts and Humanities

La Güera Rodríguez

Brandeis University Silvia Arrom

Arts and Humanities

The Myth of Continuity in American Gun Culture

University of California Berkeley Brian DeLay

The Life of Contract Capitalism and the Building of the Colonial Railway

View more insights in Arts and Humanities - History - Asian History

View more figures from University of Nottingham

View the page of Arun Kumar

Read the Study

Arun Kumar discusses that capitalism relies on contracts, which are state-led legal regimes that guarantee free exchange of goods and property rights.

Image courtesy of interviewee. March 27, 2024

Generating Workspace

Export as PDF

This video video is a transcription of a presentation discussing a contribution to an edited volume titled "The Imperial Underbelly." The speaker focuses on their piece called "The Life of Contract Capitalism," which examines the evolution of colonial capitalism in the late 19th to early 20th century, highlighting the case of Joseph Stevens, a Scandinavian contractor in India during the 1860s.

Stevens made significant wealth by building railways and later returned to Sweden to marry into an aristocratic family. The speaker analyzes the broader relationship between contract capitalism and labor, noting that contracts historically provided stability in economic transactions but have also been critiqued as instruments of inequality under capitalism.

They discuss how contracts evolved to be viewed as agreements between equal parties, despite the unequal power dynamics often present, which critics, drawing from Marxian perspectives, argue reinforces bourgeois authority. The context of contracts in colonial India is particularly highlighted, where laws criminalized breaches by workers but not by employers, reflecting an inherent imbalance.

The speaker emphasizes the importance of examining actual contracts from Stevens' archives, showcasing how they reveal the practical implications and mistrust underlying these agreements. The contracts not only serve as tools for binding workers but also highlight a punitive approach towards labor, underscoring the exploitative nature of colonial labor regimes.

Overall, the text seeks to shed light on the complexities of contract law and its implications for labor relations in colonial contexts, calling for a reevaluation of how contracts are understood in relation to power dynamics and historical narratives in India.

Language:

Export as PDF

X-TIMESTAMP-MAP:LOCAL=00:00:00.000,MPEGTS=900000

00:00.375 --> 00:02.505
This piece of writing actually is a part

00:02.505 --> 00:06.065
of an edited volume, which has been done by gun

00:07.085 --> 00:09.025
called the Imperial Underbelly.

00:09.085 --> 00:12.225
And, I've written a piece in that called The Life

00:12.225 --> 00:13.465
of Contract Capitalism.

00:15.085 --> 00:16.495
This book,

00:16.515 --> 00:20.535
and broadly my piece, what it does is

00:20.535 --> 00:22.055
that it talks about how

00:22.895 --> 00:25.615
colonial capitalism evolves in the late 90th

00:25.715 --> 00:26.975
and early 20th century.

00:27.715 --> 00:30.895
Uh, the idea is to think through this.

00:31.275 --> 00:35.175
So via a person called, Joseph Stevens,

00:35.585 --> 00:39.215
who's a Scandinavian guy who goes to India in the 1860s

00:39.875 --> 00:40.895
to build railways.

00:40.915 --> 00:42.015
And he's, he's nothing.

00:42.285 --> 00:45.655
He's, he's a 19-year-old guy,

00:46.125 --> 00:50.535
basically a middle class guy whose father is a professor at,

00:50.755 --> 00:52.575
at Danish University in Denmark.

00:53.475 --> 00:56.895
And, this profess, this professor's son, he goes

00:56.895 --> 01:01.615
to India, and, he makes lots of money billing railways,

01:02.195 --> 01:03.215
as a contractor,

01:03.275 --> 01:08.255
and then returns back to India, in the, in the 1870s,

01:09.195 --> 01:12.735
and, gets a lot of money and buys a state

01:12.735 --> 01:15.615
and marries to an aristocratic family, goes

01:15.735 --> 01:20.015
to Swedish parliament and becomes this aristocratic naab.

01:20.395 --> 01:23.455
So it is like the classic example of this,

01:23.925 --> 01:28.015
British officials, life who, basically these guys,

01:28.555 --> 01:32.695
who went to India and, and made rich,

01:32.835 --> 01:36.975
and return back to England to, to have a very, lavish

01:36.975 --> 01:38.175
and aristocratic life.

01:38.235 --> 01:42.175
So this is basically a Swedish, counterpart,

01:42.235 --> 01:43.815
to these British, officials.

01:45.315 --> 01:49.055
Now, what I'm trying to do in this piece is basically

01:49.055 --> 01:53.535
to think of the relationship between contract capitalism

01:54.755 --> 01:56.055
and, labor.

01:57.355 --> 02:00.055
And what I'm trying to say in that book,

02:00.235 --> 02:04.655
and in that piece, is to think, that

02:04.875 --> 02:08.095
how the ideas of contract,

02:08.235 --> 02:11.695
and contract work evolves in the 19th century.

02:12.155 --> 02:15.015
Now, when we think of contract, all

02:15.015 --> 02:16.855
of us have some understanding of contract

02:16.855 --> 02:19.615
because we do sign different kinds of contracts,

02:19.715 --> 02:20.775
in our lives.

02:20.835 --> 02:23.415
We sign rental contracts with our landlords.

02:23.415 --> 02:24.975
We sign contracts with banks.

02:25.635 --> 02:27.695
Uh, most importantly, we sign contracts

02:27.695 --> 02:29.615
with our employers, right?

02:29.835 --> 02:32.135
So we have some understanding of contract.

02:32.195 --> 02:36.775
But, what is it, what is the history of the contract

02:37.315 --> 02:41.655
and what is it specific history in relations to capitalism?

02:42.235 --> 02:45.815
Now, contract has been there always in the history,

02:46.045 --> 02:47.335
that we know for sure.

02:47.515 --> 02:50.615
And these contracts were probably not necessarily,

02:51.175 --> 02:54.575
workers' contract, or contract between employers

02:54.575 --> 02:58.215
and employees, but they, there were contracts between,

02:58.525 --> 03:03.085
different entities, re regulating services, delivery

03:03.085 --> 03:06.045
of services, delivery of things.

03:08.165 --> 03:12.425
So, contract in that sense, fulfills a very prominent role,

03:12.805 --> 03:16.145
in the business life, that is to ensure,

03:16.255 --> 03:21.225
safe delivery of things, trusted transaction,

03:21.225 --> 03:22.705
that could be an economic transaction

03:22.705 --> 03:23.785
or a transaction of things.

03:24.405 --> 03:26.705
Um, so in a way, it kind of brings stability

03:26.725 --> 03:28.025
to the business, right?

03:28.965 --> 03:32.665
For a long time, this idea of contract,

03:33.245 --> 03:34.265
was there.

03:34.285 --> 03:39.105
But during the capitalism, what happens is that it gives,

03:39.365 --> 03:40.385
it gets a new life.

03:40.605 --> 03:43.385
And what is that new life is that it is seen as in kind

03:43.385 --> 03:46.825
of this harger of bringing equality between people.

03:46.965 --> 03:51.265
And, I'm, I'm referring here, a context which,

03:51.315 --> 03:55.385
which is kind of happening in a, in a, in a very,

03:55.385 --> 03:59.545
charged situation, that there is slavery, outside

03:59.565 --> 04:01.945
of the British Empire, sorry,

04:01.945 --> 04:02.945
within the British Empire,

04:02.965 --> 04:05.825
but outside of England, or France.

04:06.405 --> 04:09.585
Uh, but there is also this idea of enlightenment,

04:09.855 --> 04:13.505
individuality after the French Revolution, the idea

04:13.695 --> 04:16.425
that people have their own rational thoughts

04:16.605 --> 04:19.505
and, people are individual, beings,

04:19.605 --> 04:22.065
and they should be able to kind of freely interact.

04:22.325 --> 04:25.345
And precisely, this is the moment when scholars,

04:25.485 --> 04:29.385
or, thinkers like Adam Smiths are writing their work on,

04:30.165 --> 04:33.825
free, free, waste capitalism.

04:35.185 --> 04:39.125
Now, what contract kind of adds to this,

04:39.125 --> 04:41.325
historical context, is

04:41.635 --> 04:44.965
that it becomes an entity in facilitating

04:44.995 --> 04:49.085
that a liberal understanding of, of, of our word,

04:49.305 --> 04:51.485
or liberal understanding of capitalism.

04:51.545 --> 04:55.405
If you can say more precisely, what I mean by that is that

04:56.065 --> 05:00.765
people thought that contract is basically a contract

05:00.765 --> 05:04.525
between two equal entities or two free individuals.

05:04.905 --> 05:08.245
And in that sense, it brings, on the one hand the issue

05:08.245 --> 05:09.965
of rationality and individuality.

05:10.385 --> 05:13.725
On the other hand, it kind of also results many

05:13.725 --> 05:15.485
of the complex processes of,

05:15.705 --> 05:19.885
or issues of classical political economy that is free wage,

05:19.885 --> 05:23.725
labor of free exchange of goods and, and money.

05:24.865 --> 05:29.285
And what happens is that contracts gets embedded in,

05:29.505 --> 05:32.845
in economic transactions in the life of, of the state.

05:34.565 --> 05:37.105
But there's also kind of a critique

05:37.455 --> 05:40.545
that simultaneously gets developed of the contract.

05:42.145 --> 05:45.725
And this critique emerges more strongly, in the, in the,

05:46.185 --> 05:47.525
in the writings of the legal,

05:47.705 --> 05:49.725
its scholar called Critical Legal, its scholar.

05:49.865 --> 05:52.285
And they started saying that

05:53.215 --> 05:55.085
these contexts do not necessarily

05:57.115 --> 06:01.545
Refer or produce a free, or equal regimes.

06:02.125 --> 06:03.825
And these contacts are not necessarily

06:03.825 --> 06:05.025
between equal parties.

06:05.645 --> 06:09.105
Rather, what we see is that there is one unequal party,

06:09.245 --> 06:12.265
and then there is, more kind

06:12.265 --> 06:14.385
of a powerful party on the other side.

06:15.175 --> 06:18.025
What they said they said was basically they were drawing

06:18.175 --> 06:19.745
upon Marxian understanding.

06:20.325 --> 06:23.265
Uh, and Karl Marx had a very, strong kind

06:23.265 --> 06:26.145
of understanding about capitalism, which basically he said

06:26.145 --> 06:27.665
that it's, unequal

06:27.965 --> 06:30.745
and, it is, it produces violence,

06:30.885 --> 06:32.785
it produces, its own doubt.

06:33.325 --> 06:35.665
So he basically said that capitalism is like,

06:35.665 --> 06:37.625
basically filled with, with blood

06:37.645 --> 06:40.545
and dirt from, from head to toe.

06:41.725 --> 06:44.305
And he also kind of critiqued contracts

06:44.305 --> 06:47.465
because he said that in a way it reestablished the authority

06:47.485 --> 06:49.825
of the bourgeois people, the middle class

06:49.925 --> 06:52.705
or the rich, employer class,

06:52.815 --> 06:54.025
because they wanted

06:54.165 --> 06:56.905
to have an instrument which allowed a kind of a business,

06:57.205 --> 07:00.385
but people who were actually entering into the contracts

07:00.385 --> 07:02.625
with them, they were not necessarily free workers

07:02.885 --> 07:07.225
or free people, rather, they were, kind of produced,

07:07.805 --> 07:10.905
in a, in a very un unfree manner.

07:11.045 --> 07:14.305
And he gives examples of, of various types

07:14.305 --> 07:15.465
of labor regimes.

07:16.125 --> 07:18.585
Now, what happens with this kind

07:18.585 --> 07:21.105
of critical legal scholarship is that that idea,

07:21.135 --> 07:23.425
that benign idea, that contract is a

07:23.445 --> 07:25.985
and transaction between the two free individual party,

07:26.325 --> 07:30.625
it gets started kind of questioning, and,

07:30.965 --> 07:33.545
and it pro it started kind of producing its own kind

07:33.545 --> 07:34.785
of fizzes,

07:34.925 --> 07:38.465
and we start seeing that how, how could the,

07:38.895 --> 07:43.345
like a worker who is earning, probably one pound a day

07:43.365 --> 07:45.785
and, an employer who's earning,

07:46.085 --> 07:49.305
or who's making profit of thousand pounds a day,

07:49.965 --> 07:51.345
how they are kind of equal,

07:51.485 --> 07:54.985
but most importantly the equal, is there an equality

07:55.085 --> 07:57.345
of social, kind of class.

07:57.885 --> 08:01.305
Uh, so that is that, if there is a worker who's kind of,

08:01.325 --> 08:04.425
very poor, but also socially despised.

08:05.005 --> 08:07.545
And then there is this rich property money class,

08:07.585 --> 08:09.745
which is like a cultural capital in the background.

08:10.365 --> 08:12.265
So are these kind of,

08:12.335 --> 08:16.105
relationships are happening in a kind of a, in an equal

08:16.765 --> 08:18.985
way as the kind of contract,

08:19.235 --> 08:21.465
makes it out to appear like that.

08:22.005 --> 08:24.945
So my work kind of situates in that kind of debate.

08:24.965 --> 08:26.945
And, it kind of pulls out

08:27.375 --> 08:29.625
that debates into the Indian context.

08:30.085 --> 08:33.865
Uh, and it talks, through this guy Joseph Stevens,

08:33.865 --> 08:37.065
who signed a number of contracts with Indian workers.

08:37.645 --> 08:39.985
Joseph Stevens is a very kind of interesting guy.

08:40.205 --> 08:43.425
Um, he arrives India in the 1860s.

08:44.725 --> 08:47.945
And the 1860s is a period,

08:47.965 --> 08:50.665
of profound legal controversies in India.

08:51.365 --> 08:54.945
Um, so there are British officials on the one side,

08:55.105 --> 08:59.325
who wants to criminalize, all breaches of contract

08:59.325 --> 09:03.045
between a master that is mostly kind of employer

09:03.185 --> 09:06.965
or British officials, or Europeans and Indian workers.

09:07.025 --> 09:08.965
So they were saying that any breach

09:09.695 --> 09:13.845
would result in the penal, prosecution

09:13.945 --> 09:14.965
of the worker.

09:15.545 --> 09:19.525
So, for example, if a worker refused to do work,

09:19.675 --> 09:21.005
they could be sent to jail.

09:21.225 --> 09:26.045
If a domestic servant, stole something from the house,

09:26.425 --> 09:27.565
they would be sent to jail.

09:27.945 --> 09:31.725
If a worker did not come to work, they could be sent

09:31.725 --> 09:33.715
to a few months of jail.

09:34.415 --> 09:38.115
Now, on the one side of the British official was kind

09:38.115 --> 09:40.755
of this very, dangerous argument.

09:41.215 --> 09:43.235
On the other hand, there was also kind

09:43.235 --> 09:46.235
of equally dangerous kind of, argument that was coming.

09:46.735 --> 09:50.795
Uh, and that side was saying that we should,

09:51.095 --> 09:55.155
not kinda penalize all aspects of breaches of the contract,

09:55.455 --> 09:57.475
but only the fraudulent behavior.

09:58.025 --> 10:00.395
That is, if a worker has taken

10:01.375 --> 10:03.075
an advance from a employer

10:03.535 --> 10:06.035
and then refuses to work, then in that case

10:06.465 --> 10:08.435
that criminalization should be there

10:08.495 --> 10:12.155
and the worker could be sent to jail for three months.

10:12.955 --> 10:16.695
Now, what's so interesting in these, legal debates is

10:16.695 --> 10:19.255
that there is no reflection on the other side.

10:19.555 --> 10:22.935
So there is a criminalization of the work and worker,

10:23.515 --> 10:25.015
but there is no criminalization

10:25.115 --> 10:26.615
of the master or the employer.

10:26.915 --> 10:30.615
So let's say, for example, if a master refuses

10:30.635 --> 10:34.255
to pay the wage of a worker, there is no criminalization.

10:34.395 --> 10:36.055
So the master could pay the damage,

10:36.315 --> 10:37.535
but could not go to the jail

10:37.535 --> 10:39.375
practically, through the law.

10:39.555 --> 10:41.895
So in a way, it kind of protected the master,

10:42.035 --> 10:46.535
but kind of made worker kind of a criminal, in the cases

10:46.635 --> 10:47.695
of breach.

10:48.595 --> 10:51.135
Now, what's so interesting about Joseph Stevens is

10:51.135 --> 10:52.495
that when he arrives in India,

10:52.495 --> 10:54.295
these legal controversies are happening,

10:54.715 --> 10:58.895
and there is an act which is already passed in 1859,

10:59.235 --> 11:03.215
and, Joseph Stevens starts working from 18 62, 63.

11:03.675 --> 11:07.135
Now, what this act of 1859,

11:07.135 --> 11:10.455
which was basically a workers breach,

11:11.115 --> 11:13.135
con contract act, was

11:13.405 --> 11:17.575
that it basically criminalized the fraudulent behavior,

11:17.995 --> 11:19.535
the practice of taking advance.

11:20.525 --> 11:23.225
Now, the problem, with this act was

11:23.225 --> 11:26.425
that it was only implemented in presidency towns.

11:26.425 --> 11:29.385
That is cities like the big cities like Calta,

11:30.085 --> 11:31.785
Madras, or Bombay.

11:32.565 --> 11:34.665
But people like Joseph Stevens,

11:34.665 --> 11:38.065
they were working in the hinterland, the rural areas,

11:38.065 --> 11:41.065
where the railways were still kind of expanding.

11:41.405 --> 11:44.665
Uh, Joseph was there to build railways in the cotton belt

11:44.665 --> 11:47.265
because the American Civil War had happened,

11:47.445 --> 11:50.305
and there is a kind of a problem of supply of cotton.

11:50.485 --> 11:52.065
So they were looking India as a market,

11:52.765 --> 11:55.565
and, basically railway was like the savior

11:55.825 --> 11:58.045
for the British kind of industry, which will kind

11:58.045 --> 12:00.645
of bring the cotton into the global market.

12:01.225 --> 12:04.965
Um, so the problem with this act was

12:04.965 --> 12:08.045
that it could not be kind of extended to the rural areas,

12:08.225 --> 12:09.725
and it, it didn't serve the purpose.

12:10.345 --> 12:14.845
So in 1860, a new act is kind of brought out,

12:15.065 --> 12:19.005
and that act, is called, workers Dispute act.

12:19.785 --> 12:24.045
And that, law basically was predominantly

12:24.745 --> 12:26.005
for the railway itself,

12:26.265 --> 12:30.245
and that included people who delivered services of people

12:30.465 --> 12:34.845
who, provided raw material to, to, to contractors

12:35.265 --> 12:38.245
or ingenious, and it kind of

12:39.005 --> 12:40.645
criminalized their behavior.

12:40.905 --> 12:43.885
So suppose if I'm a stone man

12:43.885 --> 12:47.405
and I want to provide a stone to a contractor, let's say,

12:47.825 --> 12:50.685
of, of one quintel of stone,

12:51.345 --> 12:54.165
and I failed to kind of provide that in a,

12:54.165 --> 12:56.805
in a time delivery, then I am basically,

12:56.805 --> 12:58.045
and I've taken the money for it.

12:58.205 --> 12:59.925
I am basically a fraudulent worker,

13:00.305 --> 13:02.485
and I could be penalized, for three months.

13:03.595 --> 13:07.575
What's so interesting about Joseph Stevens, is

13:07.575 --> 13:12.175
that Joseph Steven is unable to kind of use the law

13:12.315 --> 13:14.455
as much as we have thought about.

13:16.005 --> 13:18.585
And the Indian scholarship on

13:19.185 --> 13:22.545
contract law has been mainly focusing on the law aspect.

13:22.685 --> 13:26.785
We never had real contracts, in the picture.

13:27.285 --> 13:30.425
So for the first time, we get a contract,

13:31.445 --> 13:33.225
how it looked like,

13:33.245 --> 13:35.785
and that we get from Joseph Stevens archive,

13:35.785 --> 13:38.265
which is in Sweden, and that's what I studied.

13:39.405 --> 13:40.825
So what we see is

13:40.825 --> 13:44.865
that Joseph Steven is not necessarily relying on the law

13:45.005 --> 13:48.585
aspect, but on the contract itself as a way

13:48.585 --> 13:49.625
to bind his workers.

13:50.405 --> 13:52.545
Now, how does he bind, his workers?

13:53.325 --> 13:55.745
Uh, it's something that we can further discuss on,

13:56.285 --> 13:59.985
but interestingly, wherever,

14:00.165 --> 14:01.465
the law did not reach,

14:01.605 --> 14:05.545
and, I want to give you an example from America,

14:05.545 --> 14:09.465
because, there was a lot of production, of, of,

14:09.825 --> 14:13.385
agricultural crops, especially was done by slaves

14:13.385 --> 14:14.465
and ex-slaves in America,

14:14.845 --> 14:16.345
and it was mostly in the hinterland.

14:16.485 --> 14:21.465
So Robert Steinfeld, he studied, this,

14:21.535 --> 14:23.105
regimes of labor, and he said

14:23.105 --> 14:24.945
that wherever law was not reachable,

14:25.585 --> 14:28.745
employers relied on punitive measures,

14:28.745 --> 14:31.505
basically on economic punitive me measures.

14:31.765 --> 14:34.705
So basically, punitive measures in a way

14:34.705 --> 14:37.345
that they would ask for damages from people

14:37.485 --> 14:40.305
who not deliver things or who would stop working.

14:41.205 --> 14:44.385
So Joseph, Steven is precisely doing the same thing.

14:44.445 --> 14:47.625
So you, you have like a kind of a similarity between India

14:47.765 --> 14:49.625
and America in the spirit, in the, in,

14:49.625 --> 14:53.285
in the way these employers are overcoming the problem of,

14:53.465 --> 14:55.245
workers defiance

14:55.265 --> 15:00.005
or workers, unwillingness to kind of, to, to, to,

15:00.105 --> 15:01.325
to deliver the things

15:01.325 --> 15:04.165
that they probably at one point promised, right?

15:04.505 --> 15:07.085
Uh, we can talk more about, the nature

15:07.085 --> 15:08.965
of the contract if you're interested in that.

15:09.985 --> 15:12.925
But what's so interesting about this kind of,

15:13.505 --> 15:17.565
Joseph Steven story is that he brings in the contract,

15:17.745 --> 15:21.525
in picture the, so we can see, we can read the languages

15:21.525 --> 15:24.445
of the contract, we can see who are the workers

15:24.515 --> 15:27.205
with whom he's signing for a long time.

15:27.265 --> 15:30.125
The Indian scholarship, only talked about

15:30.665 --> 15:32.205
how law is unequal.

15:32.225 --> 15:36.245
The contract law is unequal, between, employer

15:36.425 --> 15:39.765
and, employees, how it protected the Boozer class

15:39.865 --> 15:42.845
or the European, officials or planters or,

15:43.585 --> 15:46.645
or Indian, manufacturers.

15:47.065 --> 15:49.925
But it is not kinda in way protecting the worker as such.

15:50.145 --> 15:52.165
But for the first time, we see the contract

15:52.185 --> 15:54.645
and we find a new angle to that story.

15:54.945 --> 15:56.605
And that angle to the story is

15:56.605 --> 16:00.925
that imprisonment is just one aspect of, how

16:00.925 --> 16:02.045
to kind of bind the worker.

16:02.585 --> 16:05.565
The contract, the document itself is, is a way

16:05.565 --> 16:08.285
to kinda bind, bind, the worker themself.

16:08.345 --> 16:11.005
And that is to also kind of punish the worker,

16:11.585 --> 16:13.205
not necessarily by imprisoning them,

16:13.205 --> 16:16.565
but also kinda by leaving fines, by withholding wages

16:16.665 --> 16:17.965
and also cetera, et cetera.

16:18.185 --> 16:19.645
How is Stephen Defense not kind

16:19.645 --> 16:23.325
of necessarily relying on the law aspect of, of contracts,

16:23.545 --> 16:25.845
but rather the contract and the document itself?

16:27.105 --> 16:30.205
Now, the kind of contracts that I've looked in,

16:30.205 --> 16:33.885
Joseph Stevens archive, they are of,

16:34.195 --> 16:35.245
different degrees.

16:35.945 --> 16:40.245
Uh, they range from 1862 to 18, 69,

16:41.065 --> 16:45.485
and he signs a range of documents with,

16:45.665 --> 16:46.845
different types of workers.

16:47.025 --> 16:51.525
So he, for example, he signs, contracts with the workers

16:51.865 --> 16:55.445
who perform labor at his, construction site

16:55.445 --> 16:58.805
that is building of the buildings or railway fencing

16:58.945 --> 17:00.565
or, railway tracks.

17:01.315 --> 17:04.405
He's also signing contracts with, service providers.

17:04.405 --> 17:08.085
So people who provided, masonry work, people who

17:08.325 --> 17:09.965
provided stones, people who

17:10.205 --> 17:13.925
provided him, lime, limestone, people who

17:14.205 --> 17:15.365
provided, wood.

17:16.605 --> 17:19.105
So he's kind of contracting with a number

17:19.105 --> 17:20.945
of various types of stakeholders.

17:21.085 --> 17:25.185
And all of these stakeholders would come under this 1860,

17:25.565 --> 17:29.705
workman's dispute act, which basically was meant for,

17:30.165 --> 17:32.105
for, for the, for the railway,

17:32.135 --> 17:33.305
work and railway services.

17:33.685 --> 17:37.465
And it was kind of, in a way, it, it was,

17:38.165 --> 17:42.065
an act which criminalized, the, the behavior,

17:42.245 --> 17:45.425
the criminal be what, quote unquote, criminal behavior

17:45.685 --> 17:47.625
of the worker if they intended

17:47.765 --> 17:49.285
to not perform what they promised.

17:49.825 --> 17:51.365
But what's so interesting,

17:51.425 --> 17:55.925
and, what's, very useful for historians,

17:55.985 --> 17:57.965
of capitalism, of labor

17:58.425 --> 18:00.565
and of colonialism, is to see

18:00.865 --> 18:03.725
how Joseph Stevens is writing contracts very carefully

18:03.775 --> 18:05.125
every day with his workers.

18:05.865 --> 18:07.285
So, for example, I'll give you

18:07.665 --> 18:09.605
how these contracts look like.

18:09.905 --> 18:14.525
So you'll sign a, a contract with the worker X and B,

18:14.865 --> 18:18.645
and saying that you two people provide 50 workmen with,

18:18.675 --> 18:20.325
with me, with, with you.

18:20.825 --> 18:23.325
And I need this labor from this date to this date.

18:24.545 --> 18:27.045
But if you fail to provide,

18:28.085 --> 18:32.605
I have the authority to, take money

18:32.905 --> 18:34.245
as a damage from you.

18:35.025 --> 18:36.085
So,

18:36.225 --> 18:38.405
and now we are talking about a very, like, kind

18:38.405 --> 18:40.725
of a limited labor market where,

18:40.785 --> 18:42.165
the railways are expanding.

18:42.165 --> 18:46.045
In this particular area, there is a great labor demand

18:46.045 --> 18:47.525
and there is a lot of competition.

18:47.545 --> 18:51.045
But then these workers and their, their workmen

18:51.105 --> 18:53.765
or headmen of the workers are kind of dealing

18:53.765 --> 18:55.205
with a very few employers,

18:55.705 --> 18:59.005
and they're also kind of deal, they're also writing,

18:59.485 --> 19:01.965
references to these workers, like if the character

19:01.965 --> 19:03.525
of the worker is good or not.

19:03.785 --> 19:05.045
Uh, and on that basis,

19:05.045 --> 19:07.765
they would get work from other employers in future.

19:08.345 --> 19:11.805
So Stevens, for example, would, make these kind

19:11.805 --> 19:14.725
of extra kind of cautionary, extra caution.

19:15.185 --> 19:19.205
Um, in, in the contracts, in other kind of contracts,

19:19.205 --> 19:22.565
he would say that, okay, I've given you a hundred,

19:22.665 --> 19:25.625
rupees as an advance,

19:25.765 --> 19:30.465
but if you fail to, deliver the service in time,

19:31.165 --> 19:33.385
you will have to pay, this

19:33.385 --> 19:35.825
and this much amount of damage, right?

19:36.615 --> 19:39.745
Then in other sorts of contracts, he will say

19:39.745 --> 19:43.585
that we will not, provide you work in future.

19:43.685 --> 19:48.065
So it kind of, or we will not give you your wages,

19:48.245 --> 19:49.945
or for the work that you already done.

19:49.965 --> 19:53.145
So suppose if a worker has contracted something

19:53.145 --> 19:55.705
to do something and they've done only parts of,

19:55.805 --> 19:57.785
so usually the wages would be settled

19:57.875 --> 19:59.985
after like a month, right?

20:00.285 --> 20:03.665
So the, so he said that we will be, I would basically

20:04.185 --> 20:07.345
withhold your wages if you do not perform the services

20:07.535 --> 20:09.665
according to my likes.

20:10.365 --> 20:12.865
Now Steve, we have to understand Joseph Stevens also,

20:12.865 --> 20:17.265
Joseph Stevens is an employee of the British,

20:17.375 --> 20:18.785
this, GIPR,

20:18.785 --> 20:21.105
which is great India Peninsula railway company.

20:21.485 --> 20:23.345
And he has to deliver his services

20:23.365 --> 20:25.705
to this company who's building railways on behalf

20:25.705 --> 20:28.425
of the British, colonial government in India.

20:29.045 --> 20:31.905
So what we find then is that he's using

20:33.425 --> 20:38.145
contract itself to ensure, a service for himself,

20:38.605 --> 20:41.025
which is reliable, which is trustworthy.

20:41.525 --> 20:45.745
But what's so interesting about these contracts and

20:45.885 --> 20:49.325
and the language of the contract is this mistrust about

20:49.325 --> 20:52.485
Indian workers, this mistrust about the,

20:52.585 --> 20:55.005
the assumed dishonesty of worker.

20:55.275 --> 20:58.885
That the worker is a don dishonest person, quote unquote.

20:59.265 --> 21:02.605
Now, this is something that is shared widely in the 90th

21:02.605 --> 21:05.725
century, across spectrum in

21:05.905 --> 21:10.605
and across cultures by employers, that it is believed

21:10.635 --> 21:13.605
that the worker is going to basically do pure,

21:14.465 --> 21:16.725
and one has to ensure that

21:18.475 --> 21:23.395
contracts should be able to recover the damage in a way,

21:23.425 --> 21:27.515
that it doesn't do much financial damage to the employer

21:27.615 --> 21:29.355
or to the service, provider.

21:29.855 --> 21:32.235
Now, it is interesting to see,

21:32.345 --> 21:34.995
that law is working on one hand

21:35.765 --> 21:37.465
and then the contract as a document

21:37.725 --> 21:40.785
of which the laws is supposed to kind of protect, is working

21:40.805 --> 21:42.945
as in another kind of institution.

21:42.965 --> 21:45.505
So on the one hand, the law is an institution.

21:45.505 --> 21:47.985
On the other hand, contract is an institution.

21:48.565 --> 21:50.465
So we see until now,

21:50.885 --> 21:53.505
the scholarship has focused on the law aspect,

21:53.935 --> 21:56.105
whether the critical legal scholarship

21:56.105 --> 21:58.985
that I referred in the, in my first answer,

21:58.985 --> 22:01.185
that critic critical legal scholarship

22:01.205 --> 22:04.105
or even Indian labor history, which talked about unfree,

22:04.155 --> 22:07.585
labor regimes focused on how laws were unequal,

22:08.005 --> 22:10.545
but they didn't look at the language of the contract,

22:10.545 --> 22:11.545
the actual documents,

22:11.545 --> 22:15.225
because those documents were never found in the Indian,

22:15.985 --> 22:17.345
archives or Indian history.

22:17.685 --> 22:20.025
And one of the famous scholars of,

22:20.105 --> 22:21.905
Indian railway history, Ian care,

22:22.485 --> 22:24.265
he basically lemons the fact that

22:24.445 --> 22:28.545
how Indian history has been divided off, contracts.

22:28.545 --> 22:30.585
And it would have been such a wonderful thing

22:30.775 --> 22:32.705
that if we had contracts to look at.

22:33.045 --> 22:34.865
And what Joseph Steven does is

22:34.865 --> 22:37.705
that he provides those contracts to, to Indian scholars

22:37.765 --> 22:41.105
to chart new tenants of history, and history writing.

00:00 - This piece of writing actually is a part of an edited volume, which has been done by gun called the Imperial Underbelly. And, I've written a piece in that called The Life of Contract Capitalism. This book,

00:16 - and broadly my piece, what it does is that it talks about how colonial capitalism evolves in the late 90th and early 20th century. the idea is to think through this. So via a person called, Joseph Stevens, who's a Scandinavian guy who goes to India in the 1860s to build railways. And he's, he's nothing. He's, he's a 19-year-old guy,

00:46 - basically a middle class guy whose father is a professor at, at Danish University in Denmark. And, this profess, this professor's son, he goes to India, and, he makes lots of money billing railways, as a contractor, and then returns back to India, in the, in the 1870s, and, gets a lot of money and buys a state and marries to an aristocratic family, goes to Swedish parliament and becomes this aristocratic naab. So it is like the classic example of this,

01:23 - British officials, life who, basically these guys, who went to India and, and made rich, and return back to England to, to have a very, lavish and aristocratic life. So this is basically a Swedish, counterpart, to these British, officials. Now, what I'm trying to do in this piece is basically to think of the relationship between contract capitalism and, labor. And what I'm trying to say in that book,

02:00 - and in that piece, is to think, that how the ideas of contract, and contract work evolves in the 19th century. Now, when we think of contract, all of us have some understanding of contract because we do sign different kinds of contracts, in our lives. We sign rental contracts with our landlords. We sign contracts with banks. most importantly, we sign contracts

02:27 - with our employers, right? So we have some understanding of contract. But, what is it, what is the history of the contract and what is it specific history in relations to capitalism? Now, contract has been there always in the history, that we know for sure. And these contracts were probably not necessarily, workers' contract, or contract between employers and employees, but they, there were contracts between, different entities, re regulating services, delivery

03:03 - of services, delivery of things. So, contract in that sense, fulfills a very prominent role, in the business life, that is to ensure, safe delivery of things, trusted transaction, that could be an economic transaction or a transaction of things. so in a way, it kind of brings stability to the business, right? For a long time, this idea of contract, was there.

03:34 - But during the capitalism, what happens is that it gives, it gets a new life. And what is that new life is that it is seen as in kind of this harger of bringing equality between people. And, I'm, I'm referring here, a context which, which is kind of happening in a, in a, in a very, charged situation, that there is slavery, outside of the British Empire, sorry, within the British Empire, but outside of England, or France.

04:06 - but there is also this idea of enlightenment, individuality after the French Revolution, the idea that people have their own rational thoughts and, people are individual, beings, and they should be able to kind of freely interact. And precisely, this is the moment when scholars, or, thinkers like Adam Smiths are writing their work on, free, free, waste capitalism. Now, what contract kind of adds to this, historical context, is

04:41 - that it becomes an entity in facilitating that a liberal understanding of, of, of our word, or liberal understanding of capitalism. If you can say more precisely, what I mean by that is that people thought that contract is basically a contract between two equal entities or two free individuals. And in that sense, it brings, on the one hand the issue of rationality and individuality. On the other hand, it kind of also results many of the complex processes of,

05:15 - or issues of classical political economy that is free wage, labor of free exchange of goods and, and money. And what happens is that contracts gets embedded in, in economic transactions in the life of, of the state. But there's also kind of a critique that simultaneously gets developed of the contract. And this critique emerges more strongly, in the, in the, in the writings of the legal, its scholar called Critical Legal, its scholar. And they started saying that

05:53 - these contexts do not necessarily Refer or produce a free, or equal regimes. And these contacts are not necessarily between equal parties. Rather, what we see is that there is one unequal party, and then there is, more kind of a powerful party on the other side. What they said they said was basically they were drawing upon Marxian understanding. and Karl Marx had a very, strong kind

06:23 - of understanding about capitalism, which basically he said that it's, unequal and, it is, it produces violence, it produces, its own doubt. So he basically said that capitalism is like, basically filled with, with blood and dirt from, from head to toe. And he also kind of critiqued contracts because he said that in a way it reestablished the authority of the bourgeois people, the middle class

06:49 - or the rich, employer class, because they wanted to have an instrument which allowed a kind of a business, but people who were actually entering into the contracts with them, they were not necessarily free workers or free people, rather, they were, kind of produced, in a, in a very un unfree manner. And he gives examples of, of various types of labor regimes. Now, what happens with this kind

07:18 - of critical legal scholarship is that that idea, that benign idea, that contract is a and transaction between the two free individual party, it gets started kind of questioning, and, and it pro it started kind of producing its own kind of fizzes, and we start seeing that how, how could the, like a worker who is earning, probably one pound a day and, an employer who's earning, or who's making profit of thousand pounds a day,

07:49 - how they are kind of equal, but most importantly the equal, is there an equality of social, kind of class. so that is that, if there is a worker who's kind of, very poor, but also socially despised. And then there is this rich property money class, which is like a cultural capital in the background. So are these kind of, relationships are happening in a kind of a, in an equal way as the kind of contract,

08:19 - makes it out to appear like that. So my work kind of situates in that kind of debate. And, it kind of pulls out that debates into the Indian context. and it talks, through this guy Joseph Stevens, who signed a number of contracts with Indian workers. Joseph Stevens is a very kind of interesting guy. he arrives India in the 1860s. And the 1860s is a period, of profound legal controversies in India.

08:51 - so there are British officials on the one side, who wants to criminalize, all breaches of contract between a master that is mostly kind of employer or British officials, or Europeans and Indian workers. So they were saying that any breach would result in the penal, prosecution of the worker. So, for example, if a worker refused to do work, they could be sent to jail. If a domestic servant, stole something from the house,

09:26 - they would be sent to jail. If a worker did not come to work, they could be sent to a few months of jail. Now, on the one side of the British official was kind of this very, dangerous argument. On the other hand, there was also kind of equally dangerous kind of, argument that was coming. and that side was saying that we should, not kinda penalize all aspects of breaches of the contract, but only the fraudulent behavior.

09:58 - That is, if a worker has taken an advance from a employer and then refuses to work, then in that case that criminalization should be there and the worker could be sent to jail for three months. Now, what's so interesting in these, legal debates is that there is no reflection on the other side. So there is a criminalization of the work and worker, but there is no criminalization of the master or the employer.

10:26 - So let's say, for example, if a master refuses to pay the wage of a worker, there is no criminalization. So the master could pay the damage, but could not go to the jail practically, through the law. So in a way, it kind of protected the master, but kind of made worker kind of a criminal, in the cases of breach. Now, what's so interesting about Joseph Stevens is that when he arrives in India,

10:52 - these legal controversies are happening, and there is an act which is already passed in 1859, and, Joseph Stevens starts working from 18 62, 63. Now, what this act of 1859, which was basically a workers breach, con contract act, was that it basically criminalized the fraudulent behavior, the practice of taking advance. Now, the problem, with this act was that it was only implemented in presidency towns.

11:26 - That is cities like the big cities like Calta, Madras, or Bombay. But people like Joseph Stevens, they were working in the hinterland, the rural areas, where the railways were still kind of expanding. Joseph was there to build railways in the cotton belt because the American Civil War had happened, and there is a kind of a problem of supply of cotton. So they were looking India as a market, and, basically railway was like the savior

11:55 - for the British kind of industry, which will kind of bring the cotton into the global market. so the problem with this act was that it could not be kind of extended to the rural areas, and it, it didn't serve the purpose. So in 1860, a new act is kind of brought out, and that act, is called, workers Dispute act. And that, law basically was predominantly for the railway itself, and that included people who delivered services of people

12:30 - who, provided raw material to, to, to contractors or ingenious, and it kind of criminalized their behavior. So suppose if I'm a stone man and I want to provide a stone to a contractor, let's say, of, of one quintel of stone, and I failed to kind of provide that in a, in a time delivery, then I am basically, and I've taken the money for it. I am basically a fraudulent worker,

13:00 - and I could be penalized, for three months. What's so interesting about Joseph Stevens, is that Joseph Steven is unable to kind of use the law as much as we have thought about. And the Indian scholarship on contract law has been mainly focusing on the law aspect. We never had real contracts, in the picture. So for the first time, we get a contract, how it looked like, and that we get from Joseph Stevens archive,

13:35 - which is in Sweden, and that's what I studied. So what we see is that Joseph Steven is not necessarily relying on the law aspect, but on the contract itself as a way to bind his workers. Now, how does he bind, his workers? it's something that we can further discuss on, but interestingly, wherever, the law did not reach, and, I want to give you an example from America,

14:05 - because, there was a lot of production, of, of, agricultural crops, especially was done by slaves and ex-slaves in America, and it was mostly in the hinterland. So Robert Steinfeld, he studied, this, regimes of labor, and he said that wherever law was not reachable, employers relied on punitive measures, basically on economic punitive me measures. So basically, punitive measures in a way

14:34 - that they would ask for damages from people who not deliver things or who would stop working. So Joseph, Steven is precisely doing the same thing. So you, you have like a kind of a similarity between India and America in the spirit, in the, in, in the way these employers are overcoming the problem of, workers defiance or workers, unwillingness to kind of, to, to, to, to deliver the things that they probably at one point promised, right?

15:04 - we can talk more about, the nature of the contract if you're interested in that. But what's so interesting about this kind of, Joseph Steven story is that he brings in the contract, in picture the, so we can see, we can read the languages of the contract, we can see who are the workers with whom he's signing for a long time. The Indian scholarship, only talked about how law is unequal. The contract law is unequal, between, employer

15:36 - and, employees, how it protected the Boozer class or the European, officials or planters or, or Indian, manufacturers. But it is not kinda in way protecting the worker as such. But for the first time, we see the contract and we find a new angle to that story. And that angle to the story is that imprisonment is just one aspect of, how to kind of bind the worker. The contract, the document itself is, is a way

16:05 - to kinda bind, bind, the worker themself. And that is to also kind of punish the worker, not necessarily by imprisoning them, but also kinda by leaving fines, by withholding wages and also cetera, et cetera. How is Stephen Defense not kind of necessarily relying on the law aspect of, of contracts, but rather the contract and the document itself? Now, the kind of contracts that I've looked in, Joseph Stevens archive, they are of,

16:34 - different degrees. they range from 1862 to 18, 69, and he signs a range of documents with, different types of workers. So he, for example, he signs, contracts with the workers who perform labor at his, construction site that is building of the buildings or railway fencing or, railway tracks. He's also signing contracts with, service providers. So people who provided, masonry work, people who

17:08 - provided stones, people who provided him, lime, limestone, people who provided, wood. So he's kind of contracting with a number of various types of stakeholders. And all of these stakeholders would come under this 1860, workman's dispute act, which basically was meant for, for, for the, for the railway, work and railway services. And it was kind of, in a way, it, it was,

17:38 - an act which criminalized, the, the behavior, the criminal be what, quote unquote, criminal behavior of the worker if they intended to not perform what they promised. But what's so interesting, and, what's, very useful for historians, of capitalism, of labor and of colonialism, is to see how Joseph Stevens is writing contracts very carefully every day with his workers.

18:05 - So, for example, I'll give you how these contracts look like. So you'll sign a, a contract with the worker X and B, and saying that you two people provide 50 workmen with, with me, with, with you. And I need this labor from this date to this date. But if you fail to provide, I have the authority to, take money as a damage from you. So,

18:36 - and now we are talking about a very, like, kind of a limited labor market where, the railways are expanding. In this particular area, there is a great labor demand and there is a lot of competition. But then these workers and their, their workmen or headmen of the workers are kind of dealing with a very few employers, and they're also kind of deal, they're also writing, references to these workers, like if the character

19:01 - of the worker is good or not. and on that basis, they would get work from other employers in future. So Stevens, for example, would, make these kind of extra kind of cautionary, extra caution. in, in the contracts, in other kind of contracts, he would say that, okay, I've given you a hundred, rupees as an advance, but if you fail to, deliver the service in time, you will have to pay, this

19:33 - and this much amount of damage, right? Then in other sorts of contracts, he will say that we will not, provide you work in future. So it kind of, or we will not give you your wages, or for the work that you already done. So suppose if a worker has contracted something to do something and they've done only parts of, so usually the wages would be settled after like a month, right? So the, so he said that we will be, I would basically

20:04 - withhold your wages if you do not perform the services according to my likes. Now Steve, we have to understand Joseph Stevens also, Joseph Stevens is an employee of the British, this, GIPR, which is great India Peninsula railway company. And he has to deliver his services to this company who's building railways on behalf of the British, colonial government in India. So what we find then is that he's using

20:33 - contract itself to ensure, a service for himself, which is reliable, which is trustworthy. But what's so interesting about these contracts and and the language of the contract is this mistrust about Indian workers, this mistrust about the, the assumed dishonesty of worker. That the worker is a don dishonest person, quote unquote. Now, this is something that is shared widely in the 90th century, across spectrum in and across cultures by employers, that it is believed

21:10 - that the worker is going to basically do pure, and one has to ensure that contracts should be able to recover the damage in a way, that it doesn't do much financial damage to the employer or to the service, provider. Now, it is interesting to see, that law is working on one hand and then the contract as a document of which the laws is supposed to kind of protect, is working as in another kind of institution.

21:42 - So on the one hand, the law is an institution. On the other hand, contract is an institution. So we see until now, the scholarship has focused on the law aspect, whether the critical legal scholarship that I referred in the, in my first answer, that critic critical legal scholarship or even Indian labor history, which talked about unfree, labor regimes focused on how laws were unequal, but they didn't look at the language of the contract,

22:10 - the actual documents, because those documents were never found in the Indian, archives or Indian history. And one of the famous scholars of, Indian railway history, Ian care, he basically lemons the fact that how Indian history has been divided off, contracts. And it would have been such a wonderful thing that if we had contracts to look at. And what Joseph Steven does is

22:34 - that he provides those contracts to, to Indian scholars to chart new tenants of history, and history writing.

Faculti AI can make mistakes