PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
Reference -
CO
882
2
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH—NOT TO
34
For the disposal of this sum the defendant accounted for about 125 dollars, leaving quite unaccounted for 61 dollars, a sum, not great in itself, but very con- siderable, when it is borne in mind that it was taken from the wages of the men who were in receipt of an average of from 3 to 34 dollars per month.
I did not deem it expedient to insist in this count, as the evidence showed me that, though the deduction had been made without properly consulting the con. tributors, it had not properly been withheld by force; and further that, even if the count had been amended, it would have been almost impossible to prove illegal use of the balance which may have existed after paying for the "Ghoon."
VII. The seventh count was retained in the amended complaint, but was slightly modified, as the deduction in question was only made on one occasion, namely: When a pump was erected on the estate in November or December, 1870. In the amended complaint, it was as follows: "That 1 dollar was cut off from their wages to pay for a pump erected on the estate."
When the band to which almost all of the complainants belonged went to work on "Mount Choisy Estate, about three years ago, it seems to have been one of the stipulations of their Sirdar that, if the band engaged with Mr. Poulin, the water supply or the estate should be increased. At that time the only means by which labourers could obtain water was by a bucket and rope from a draw-well. Matters continued so until the end of 1870, when a pump, which had been ordered in France, was erected on the estate. On the pay-day after its erection, 1 dollar was retained from the wages of all the men of "Bois Rouge" camp, to assist in paying for the pump. Within a fortnight, it was found that the wheel of the pump was too heavy to be easily worked by the men, and, at their request, it was removed. The com- plainants all denied ever having been consulted as to paying for the pump, and especially they denied that the dollar above referred to was retained with their consent or acquicscence.
Here also there was a misrepresentation in the book of the estate. For though, as will be seen immediately, the fact of taking the money is admitted by the defendant, -nothing in his books showed that this large proportion of the monthly wages of each man had been retained-but, on the contrary, the wages of the month were marked as fully paid, subject to the usual deductions."
The statement of the defendant was :--
"On the 3rd October last, I received 98 dollars from a gang of about 113 men for a pump which I put up at their request. I established the pump in a well situated in their camp, called Bois Rouge.' There had been no pump before. Water used to be drawn from the well by means of buckets. It was solely for their convenience, and not for my own purposes, that I bought the pump, which cost me 688 dollars.”
The defendant's evidence was here also given by his employés, and was to the effect that the pump was erected following on a promise by the men that they would subscribe to the extent to which their wages were retained. This negotiation was alleged to have been carried through by Lutchman, who denied ever having consented for himself or his hand to pay for a pump if erected.
It is clear that the transaction was not a straightforward one, or the money retained to pay for the pump would have been so entered on the books, and would not have been marked as duly paid to the men. I do not think that the evidence
of any mutual agreement to pay for the pump between Mr. Poulin and his men is proved, and my opinion that there never was such an understanding is strengthened by the fact that no such agreement was mentioned by the defendant in his statement to Mr. Beyts, as the reason why he "received" the 98 dollars. The process referred to by him as "receiving," was proved to have been this: That, as the men were paid, the cashier took 1 dollar from the amount of each man's wages, put it aside, and handed the balance to the labourers.
The conclusion I come to on the evidence is, that 1 dollar was deducted from the wages of each of the complainants, to pay for the erection of the pump, which remained for a fortnight on the well of the "Bois Rouge" Camp, and that there is no satisfactory evidence that this was done with the consent of the complainants.
VIII. The eighth Count was rejected in the amended complaint. This was done because it was evident that the grievance was one from which only one or two of the band had suffered. It is proper, however, to mention here that, in the only case of this kind which came out before the 'Stipendiary Magistrate, it was proved that a very illegal and oppressive practice was in force on the estate. Apparently, firewood is not abundant on the estate, and though a field is now and again pointed out to the
35
men from which they may collect such fuel as they can, this is not done often enough to supply their wants. When, however, men are found taking wood or brushwood anywhere else, they are taken before their Master, and by him allowed the choice either of paying a fine fixed by himself, or of being taken before the Police Magistrate. Of course, such a mode of dealing with an Indian opens up a wide field for exaction and oppression, he knows not the punishment to which a Magistrate would sentence him, and prefers to accept a fine of 10 dollars (such was the fine inflicted in this case), -the entire wages of a quarter of a year,-to being taken before a Magistrate. Nor is "Mount Choisy" the only Estate in which Indians are so treated. Among the witnesses for the defence was one Mr. Antoine Genève, the Manager of "Fairfund," a neighbouring estate. This gentleman's deposition, so far as it bore on this matter, was a statement that he was accustomed to act in a similar manner.
IX. The ninth count was retained in the amended complaint, and was as follows: -"That when they do not finish the task assigned to them for a day, a portion of their wages for that day is cut off."
The evidence laid before the Court in relation to this count showed that on the pretext of non-fulfilment of tasks large sums, in proportion to their wages, were retained by Mr. Poulin from his labourers. This system of exaction was not denied by the defendant in his statement to the Protector of Immigrants, though the admission is alightly qualified. His statement was that—"When a task which can be finished by most of the men of a gang is not gone through by any man, this is how I manage: When 200 holes are given to be as the task, if only 100 be made I mark 'malade-travail,' which leads to the man's not being paid, but he is fed; when 150 holes are gone through I don't stop the pay, unless it be often repeated."
The evidence in relation to this count showed that the following is the system in use upon the estate :-
The great majority of the labourers of " Bois Rouge" camp work by what is called "task work" that is a certain amount of work is assigned to the men every morning, which forms the "task" for the day. Strong active men are often able to accomplish the task by two or three o'clock in the afteruocn, and they are then at liberty for the day. As noticed above, however, there is reason to suspect that when a man by repeatedly finishing his task early in the afternoon, gives evidence of unusual energy, the task allotted to him is increased without any proportionate increase being made in his wages. From the evidence it appeared that a considerable number of the labourers were only just able to finish their tasks by 5 o'clock, or were unable to do so. With those in the latter position the method pursued was this: at about 5 o'clock, shortly before stopping work for the day, one of the defendant's overseers went round the fields and examined the tasks of those who were still at work. The names of these men were then marked down as having been guilty of (what was called on the estate) "sick-work.' The complainants all stated that "sick-work" was marked against them whenever the task was not completely finished, and quite irrespective of the amount of work which had been performed. The list thus made out was forwarded to the defen- dant, by whom the mark "M" (Malade-travail) was inserted in the column of the estate book for the day, against the names of each of the men mentioned in the list. From this book the wages of the men are calculated,, and in doing so 6d. is deducted from the labourer's wages for each "M" which is to be found against his name for the month. When it is considered that this is more than the average day's wages of a labourer, the hardship and injustice of such a practice is at once apparent. This grievance is aggravated by the fact that the men are too ignorant to be able to check the calculations for the deductions, and, receiving pay only once a month, are not even able to know whether they are treated fairly according to this illegal system. They are entirely at the mercy of their master, whose book is the final referee between them.
1
An examination of the book of the estate, showed that every month a large number of the complainants were marked for "sick-work" at least once. The defendant examined three or four of his employés, especially those who carried out for him this system of marking. All of these admitted the system, but said that the marks were not put against a labourer unless he had failed to finish the task for two or three days, or unless the work was carelessly done.
Taken against the combined statements of the complainants, and the system being admitted, I do not think that the alleged qualification can be considered as proved. The result of the evidence was to convince me that this count was proved, and that Od. was deducted from the wages of the complainants for each time that they did not fulfil the daily task allotted to them.