. P'easant Di.

.ud

i.n. late
Bombay and
P'um1j1a,b Sa.tisb Chandra Mishra 3
Di.IJ'OISCSii,aa md Differentii,aUon of
p,aa&DIIbJ m1 l . .be Punj,ab Durin1
.Rul:e N.av1ed Hamid 52
A.ccUIIIIul&llilion and Aulbori1ari1anism on
tb1e Pio,oeer Prooder ,o1f Br:azil J,oe fo,w,eraker 9.:5
FR.A,N.K CASS & 00. L Tn.
1
0AINSBOIR,
1
0'UOH HOUSE,, GA-N'SBIOR0
1
'UGH .ROAD,
L01NDO'N E 'I :l rRS
118
-
.
\.
BOOKREVffiWS
Pe:asant Nationa:lis:ts ofG,ujarat:
Kheda D'istri'ct,. 19'1 'J:..J934,
b'Y David Hardim.an
Rice Economy and L,an,d Tenure ,in We-S'I
Malaysia.,,
by Ke:nso Hor
The Struggle in the Andent Oref!k
Wo,rldfro,m ,the Arch.alc Ag:e to th!e' Arab
Cmrzqu,es,ts.,
HiogAi,Yun
HB
121
by 0 .. E .. M. de Ste .. Pcter Oarns,cy 123
.Seler:.te:d Essa:y,s ofFre:drik B:arth',. I:
Pr:ocess and Form in So,c:iul Lije.,
V:olume 11.: Fe:atulies and'
Sodety in! Swat Akbar S. Ahm.'ed 12.6
and An Essay on
Enti.tlement an,d Deprivati:o,n:,
" by Amartya Sen Nigem 12:8
The P'olit:ical of R'ura,l
Dievelop,ment. ln'ternationtli
Capital, ,and' th'e Stille,,
by Rosemary E. OaUl P'ervmz Naziir 1.30
A of the .Ouyanese Worldng P,eople,
18:8'1-1905,
by W.alt,er Rodney Madett.a. Mo,rris:s.ey I. 312
lnd'ustrial De,ve:lop,ment ,an,d Migratl'.t
La'b:O'Ii.r,,
bry Juan Laite
1bu:arregs Nlg:eriens.: Unit;: ,culturrell'e et
.dl11:er:s,it:e
1
regi:OIJ'Qll' d''un peuple'past:eur,,
PerUn
by Bdmo,nd Bemus. Sue Mardn
The En!danered Sex. Neglec:t ojFemG:I'e
Cll.:,il'dren ,tn Rura:IJn,dia,
by ,arbara MiU.er Ursul.a M.
Th!e Pt:J,litir:-s Su,g:ar
Co-,operatlves in R'uru.l Mtlhtlrasft',tru,,
'114"'
,II _ i;JI
by B. s., Bav:iskar l.anad1u.a: Chith,e:J,en 1144
T:h!e S:truggle LtJ'n,d: A Ec:o,nomy
qf the Ptoneer Fr;ontier .in Brazilfrom
193,0 to tlle Present Day,
by Jo,e Jlan &ox.borou,slb 41
The Introduction of Free Labour on Slio P'aulo
Plantations
Verena Stolcke* and Michael M. HaU**
INTRODUCTION
As a country with abundant land and a rel!atively scarce population. Erazi]
confronted specia1 problems in the creation of a labour force. Until the 1850s ..
slaves rnade up the bulk of the workforce needed by large-s.cale export
agriculture. By the mid-nineteenth ,c,entury, however, as slavery came under
increasing attadc, at J,east some So P'aulo coffee planters began experimenting
with free labour. The abomion of the sl!ave trade in 1850. moreover. coincided
with tbe penetration and rapid exp,ansion of coffee in western Sao Paulo .. due to
the dedine of the other main coffee-growing regjon- the P'araiba VaUey- and
in response to lhe growing international demand for coffee. The of
free in So P'a.ulo agriculture is. in e'ffect an instance of the creation of a
fr,e.e la.bour force in a of agricultmal development under con-
ditions of potentially scarce .labour supply. 'Our soil offers unlimited weaUh.
but we Iack labour/ as one contemporary put the crucial obstacle to continued
agricuHural deveJopment which So Paulo planters raced in the Second half of
the nineteenth century.
1
The most forward-looki.ng cofTee planters dearly sa.w
alter l8.50 that a way of replacing slave llabour. or at least supplcmenting it.
wouJd have tobe found in the fa.irl.y near futurein order to proviidie the si1zeable
number of workers requ.ired for this very labour-i1ntensive crop. Sliwery in fact
cont.inued! unt.il 1888, but it was precisely the increasing debate over the l!abour
quesHon,. a.nd! the experi1mentation in the followi.ng decades by Sao P;wlo
planters, which eventually made possible a rellatively non-violent transition to
free labour.
The creation of a. l!abour i1s never an ex.dusi1vclly dcmogrnphic qucstion.
]n the of a readlily a.vailablle local reserve of lahom .. So Paulo plancers
resorted to t.he use of i.mmig.rant workers. thcir cxpcdence with
slaves had made them acutely awar'e of the necd cffcctivc of labour
control'. Thus, issue planters faccd lhrnughotH thc sccond hrtiJ
of the nineteenth ,c,entury wa,s not only that of fi1nding a ncw sourcc <1f lahour to
replace their slaves,. also of how l.o organisc and cnntrol frcc lahour
effici.,entlly. The devellopment and organi1sll!(m of a flrc,c lnhour fon;c ror thc S(l
Paulo pb.ntalions was both an economic nnd a pc;ll
1
ilical Thc
dynamics of the situation dcdved from hor.h t.hc ccnnnmic uf thc
pJ.a.nters and from the ba.rga.ining ,power availnhlc to tr, rcsht thc
planters' impositions.
The objective of this a.rticlc is lo understand hnv. S5o Paulo pl;:ullcr!'
Unt>rsuat ,,., 11Wnnma tlt .urrflona.
u Univ,rrsidadr
S.o Paulo Coffee Plantalions 171
eventually solved their labour problems .. The eiTective supply of labour at any
p.articular moment is irnportantly afTected by the sanctions and incentives
avaUable to employers to enforce their pO\\er over labour to extract profit. In
the So Paulo case. absence of an established labour market decisivelv
determined the planters choices of labour systems and their evolution. The
early difficulties with free labour have repeatedly been attributed to the relative
unprofitability of irnmigrant workers in comparison to s1aves.
2
yet what
induced planters to introduce free labour in the first place was their increasing
awareness that slavery \iii.'as doomed. The more interesting initial question. then.
is why planters lirst chose shamcropping as the labour systern under 'vhich free
Iabour was to be introduced. rather than a wage svstem or some other
..... L...- - --
arrangement.
The absence of an established labour rnarket not only decisively determined
the planters' choice of labom systems but also their fortunes '"ith them. The
success of thc labour syst,ems introduced '"as not only deterrnined by cost
factors (in the narrow sens,e of the cost of obtaining immigrant labour). nor
even by the planters' ideology (their supposed 'bacb\ardness or. alternatively.
their exemplary entrepreneurial spirit). but importantly by the struggle between
planters actions and ,,,:orkers' responses as shaped by the economic and
po1ical circumstances in which they found themsehes. As we \vill attcmpt to
show. it is this interrelationship betv.reen systems of labour exploitation and
paUerns of labour resistance which explains the successive transformations of
the forms of labour contracting adopted.
n-IE SHARECROPPING CONTRACT
In 184 7. Senator Vergueiro. the owner of a I arge estate near the town of
Limeira. in thc provincc of Sao P'aulo. became thc first planter to introduce
immigrant labour for work in coiTee production.J Vcrgueiro. as his son later put
it .. hadl foreseen that thc end of slavcrv was onllv a matter of Initially the
immigrants sccm to havc bccn offcred tv.o kinds of contract: a sharccropping
and a labour )Ieasing locaro dc scrl'i(os l contract. but they opled for thc

According to thc sharccroppi,ng contract. thc plantcr thc
immigr::mts' transportaon from thcir country of origin to thc port of Santos.
advanccd thc cost of transport from Santos tn thc Jllantlllion. as weil as thc
nnd tools thc immigrants nccdcd until thcy could pay for thcm with
thc procccds frnm c.hcir first crnps. Thc plantcr assigncd thc workcrs thc
numh,cr of tr,ccs thcy could tcnd. harvcst and prnccss. and allollcd thcm
a pkc,c of hmd (111 \!vhich tn gro\\,' thcir own food crnps. h1 acldition. thc
wcrc 11-in:n a housc. !lpparcntly frcc of chargc. Thcir rcmuncration
cnnsistcd of half t.hc nct rrolit from coiTcc and frnm thc food crops. Thc
lahnurcrs \l.:crc ohlij!cd to rcpay l.hc incurrcd hy thc plantcr nn tbcir
hclwiJ v.ith <U least ha.lf of thcir )Tarly rcturns from cofTcc. The initial cont ract
did nnt spccify lhc lcnJ.!I.h of its duratinn. hut statcd thc ammml nf thc dcbt
nwcd hv thc on :u.:cotnU nf his Iransportalion cnsls anti othcr
ml'li'aru.:cs. l;or any amnunt aftcr !wo ycars. thc lahourcr wa" to hc
172
cbarged interes.t,, wbiclll wa.s: t'o be tbe ca.sc' witb other adlv.ances after one year .
Fm.allly., tbe immtigr8JIItts move off d1t1e: untU they had
repaid tbeir debt:s:. Should tbey do' s:,o, they in,cutrred a .subs.tl.antiaJ :fine. Work
was: organisedl and s:opervised by thc pllanter his admitnislrator.
Ja.bourers: wete' e:xpJi,cildy n:qu:iired conduct. th,emsellves in a peaceful manner ..
6
The' thus: transferred aD thte e.x.penses of obt.ain1ing itmmigrant labour
kl1 th.e
1
C onsequendy, such workers start,ed aJire.ady
burd:ened by a substaDti.al! debt. U w:as g:ener.ally thal a diligent
ll.abomcr wouJd t,ake am averag,e of t'o pay off hi.s debt'
In the 185,0s, a number of pbmters.,, irnpressed by the .apparent success,
- -
o,f' the Vergueiro, ,ezperiment and conc.em;,ed with th:1e ,eftiects of tbe ter-
mina.tion ,of tbe sJ,a.ve trade, a.p,pro,acbed V erguei.ro, and to obtaitn imnrgrant
for tb.ems:elv,es. At this ,c,ontracts mon: onero,us: f7or th.e
immtiigrants:. No1t did Vergueiro and Co. begin UJ' charg,e a
missic1111, tobe debled tlo1 the Jabourers,, but mterest debts, was, now ch.arted
ftom tbe dl,a.te of arrival,. som,elimes: at a rate o( J 2 per cent rather :llh ..an the
pre:vioUts; m per ccnL
1
.M'or,eover,. from tlhe ea:dy onwards the who11,e
iiDIIIIIii!JU!ft faDJily W8S heJd fiab1),e for tJhe de:b(., WhJ!1Ch1 W3JS, the W,ay by
to attempt to pro,ted. i:n the of the death
or the family be.ad.
9
Finally, whiJI,e free had inititay been expeeted to
fb,e co"ee tbey by UI:S6 tbey were graduaJIJy ,o,fthis
task,, and in1.steadl were ch.arged a ilbed fee: per unit. of c,offee harvested.
11
By m s:ss. a,bout 3.,300 immigrantt liabo,urers: worldng
ti.on:s, m the: of Pa.ulo .. it ln most. c:ases rree llabcl'U,r exis::t,edl side by
Iide with sllavery, aJithough phmtten e.arlly on .a certain
diivilioo of ll,abom. AU l.as:ks beyond .and and
wlldclll Wiltlft; slid &o' requite supe:rvi,siJ,ont,. w,er,e ina,pp11'1o,priiate
continrued to1 be: oecuted by Such i,nclludedl
inll th,e sol fC:J,r v,lfi:ous crops,. plaatins aew yearlly etropt: for 11h,e
pll:ucadon''s co,nsumption a:nd, irn,cna.sintaJiy,, tbe proces,sinl o,r c,offee. u
Allmo1st simwbtneously.,. a, further meuu1J'\e: ditrecdy l'e:lated 1t,o lht,e: labour
probJ,em was, intil:rodiU!ced. ln ,IJ Lan,d La,w w.as, pauedi whri,cht co,nsoUdatedl
pdva.te propert,y dpta: 11111id wu intmdl,ed p1reven1. im1mt.igr.ants, fr,om:
Wandowners. tblo,ugh setdm,g, 0111 llands.J Tbe: ,of' asm
,ezpuses of' UIDQCC:IIIJ',,piJed leni!E'OIJ posed,. i1D f111d
11
Ole Of rthe seri:OU:I

empii,Ofial :lhe: Dt:l.li,oJ:ud popuW.ationt ,o,r ff1ee, never
a sigai&cut :Part of tlh,e for,ce i.n1 the mtrneteentJh c:cmCutry.
Smnce th:e immtilf'&Jn:c: llabour requi:red an itntiru:,all by
:thc: 0'1111 of their COIDts:tanll, wa:s a.o1 g,:uara,nrlee c"htis, c:.BJ!IIItall i:ntves;tl
memt u However lior the imiarants,,. clle it:n,irtiall wei1gll1ed i,nc:rea.sit.nsJ:y
bestvilly 0111 rdl,f!ir i:ntc,omte.ln praetiee., dlt,emr retums, fr:om1 c.um:ed
OUt 1'0' be mukedJy lowe;r' tha111 50 [per C:il!tt or n'ell [pnlllflt. The
seq[UI111!11CCI, wen ..
Tbe: fiirsl si,gn the mountins diaco,rnu:nrt ,am.ons i:mtmtm,rl.nl
came in wht,en a of Swiss, worken 01n the .N,orwiJ
Oliilda .nt!W The app:a.renUy s,tUitll11ed when
S,f:io Paulo Coffee Plantations 173
invaded their food P'IIOts, and di:s.agreement. over indemnity led to the interven-
tion ,of the poHc,e. Eventually. when the Swiss consul visited the plantation. the
central issue becamc th.,e: gener.m1 conditions of the immig.rants: quality of food
plob,, fuU1mment of housing, etc. typkaHy attributed the
events to in.stig,ation by subversive elem,e.nts. The conflict was
when. the consul pronti1sed the immigrants that they would be transferred to a
govern.ment that pm1. of their debts would be forgiven .. and that no
intue:rest would have be paid. Hi This conOkt Billready what were to
become S1omc ,of th1'e cruciaJ points, of cont.ention between planters and workers.
The most i.mport.ant revolt,. howev,er, began in December, among
Swiss' and German labourers on Senator modd plantation Ibicaba.
The presence Of a Swiss tea.cher, Thomas contributed to con-
v,erting the la.tent resent.ment of thc immig.rants into an organised movement of
pn,test ag.ainst wha.t the:y fe]t were grave irr,egulariti,es in the fu1fiUment of their
cootracts. They did no,:t question. the terms of the oontract as such but
agamst the calculla11tion of retum.s from coffee produ,c,ed, the charging of the
oom:mission, the exchange rate to convert their debts into
l:oca] currency. the of transport from Sant,os to the pl.ant.ation. and the
stnmge: divismon of from the s.aJ:,e of Coffee. '
17
W hat seems to have
sp,arJI,ed the revo,h was. disiUusionment with th'e resuhs of the 18:55 harvest
whi,ch,. contrary t.o t.heir did not alllow them to reduce tbeir debts. As
Davatz later what he and bis comp,.atriots demanded was no than
just !lf,e.atment u: Tbe revol:t ended when Davatz was expeUed and some of the
orther ll,eaden Jen t.he One of the which the
among tbe planters wru;, tbe accusation leveUed agai.ns1t D:avatz
that not 0'11ily WB!i he in aUEanc,e with extraneOUS demenls,. but tbat he har-
bour,ed com,mu:nhit and oU11:,er terrible: plo,ts ..
19
Many app.ear to have
been aenu.in1e:J,y terrifled that the f\evolt would not only sp,read to free labour,ers
on "''lhle-r pbm1ta.tmons> (a Unk with the e.arlier Ulbatuba confilkt was repeatedly
s.u.g!J,est,ed), . z'o but worst o,f a]ll mi.ght tbe
Mu,,ch has bee:n m:ade of 1t.hiis revo1h andl Of the fra.uds, commiued by planters
wh>ich s.upposedly tri.,gaeredl i1t ofl Thes,,e are generaUy us,ed to expla.in the
faillur:e: of t.he s'ystem under which tbe lkst immigrants
traeted. and 1the al.ll,eged decUne of mnterest among P'lan1ters in1 t.he of free


U seem:l. ho:we:ver. thal thee irregulari,ties (fraudulent
caJI,cul.atio,n of pn:Jfh.s .. etc .. ) on:ly addcd t.o' the growin.g disiUusionment
,gf i,mmisnJ,:n:m.s wi:t.h tbcir Uvin1s, and worr!kins: co,nditi1ons .. The for their
pen .. a.ct,edl unider a seri1ous .. They had n1ot counted on the
reso'u1rl:e1 &\iai,lla,bl,e: l.o ehe i1mmi,grants in resisting wh:at tbey considered unjust
- -
cc:mdiC:ii,O:l .andl i:mposic.i,om;.. The int:roduct!i1on, of free labour
requ1i1red a a.mo,rti:sad,on dem.anded a .tevel of
which the were unla,ble to The main obstade was. not the
thirell 011r pos.s:i1ble 1re1pril&ll nrorm the i1mmi1grants' national governments,, since
Pf'Oitec:lj,on w.a.s and Um1i1u:d best .
22
buc. rather. under circum
siiJincea . th:e sh:a.recro'P'P'i:n;g co,n.!IJ,ICt di:d a.ddre'Ss the of
.Cf'e&,ltin,ga 1reUablle
I
' I
174
Sharecropping and Sharecroppers
Why then did So Paulo planters adopt thc sharecropping system? H ha.s
long been maintained that sharecropJling is less dlicient than wage la.bour. the
usua] argumenl being that since sharecroppers receive only a part of the
product they wiU stop work earl'mer than a wage liabourer does.
23
More recently ..
the prevalence of sharecropping has been to i.ts greater efficiency in
risk dispersion.
24
The So Paulo planters option for sharccropping has been
interpreted in similar terms. Holloway suggested that uncertain yields
and planters to some of the potential income which \vas
exdusive]y theirs under slavery it prevented the frightening possibility that
wages might absorb more than the income from the crop.
25
This argument
obscur,es the essence of sharecropping. which is its particularly exploitalive
character. As Reid has demonstrated for the post-bellum American South.
rath,er than uncertain what in fact explains the adoption of sharecrop-
ping are the distinctive features it contains. in contrast to wage
1abour.
2
'
6
Sharecropping in a suation of scarce labour i1s in fact more efficient
than wage labour. ]t is a form of the use of labour similiar to a carefully
negotiated piecework system. Both are forms of incentive wage systems. a way
of securing extra effort from liabour. of making labourers work harder and
beuer for only a small increase in total. remuneration ovcr that of wage
labourers. Remuneration in the form of a proportion of the product constitutes
an incentive for the to intensify his dTort since i:t is on the amount
produced that his retums will depend. He will culltivate with greater ag.ain
because part of the resuh will accrue to himself. ln addition. the supervision
required will be insignificant. since control of work is by thc labourer
hims.e1f.
27
In the cas,e of So Paulo. because of the absence of a llocal supply of
workers, labour costs were at lleast initially high. Moreover. coiTee is a vcry
labour-int,ensive crop. "ecause of the incentive ellement characteristic of
sharecropping it could be that sharecroppers would tend more coffee
trees per worker than would wage labourers. Conscqucntly. '"'orkers
would be re,quired . and initial investment would bc lowcr. are
usually conl.ract,ed in fa.mily units. Thus .. sharccropping also allows thc land-
owner to benefit from the use of the sharc,croppcrs fa.mily labour.
111
Pllantcrs
had always opposed recruiting singJ,e men sincc it was argucd thnt immi,grant
famillies were lle'SS prone to abandon thc plantaons. Thi.s may bc so. out
equaUy important wa.s surdy the fact that thc immi1grants' f consti1tutcd
a cheap labo,ur reserve. A sharecropper will' acccpl a di1visinn of thc
product that will not fuHy cover lhc markcl. pricc nf family
whmch would otherwise remain undcr- or uncmrloycd. Planten;, in fad. smnc-
times prohibit,ed immi1grants an1d thc1r famiJi,c:"i. frnrn thc
plantat.i.on.
211
The thu,s obtaincd this ru.llllilional l:1b'illlr al a rnst hclo\,.
'that which he \1\IOUI'd ha.ve had to pay wen: hc Iu racl i11 nn I hc nmrkct as
wage llabou:r. Si1ncc llahour nccds lhc har\'csl wcrc nhoul onc liflh
tha.n dluring cultivation,.1 l.hc workcn;, wi1vcs and childrcn satisJadnrily
covcr this additi1onal demand.
Labourers werc also assi11-ncd a :"iuhsistcncc plnt .. lil,hich '"'a:li a hutlH:r \\,uy pf
reducing unil labour costs. These plots wcrc U.litmlly nn Iands
So P'aulo Coffee Plantations
175
not appropriate for cofTee. or on virgin land later planted in coffee. \Vorkers
had no efTective possession of the land. Ideally. the:y \Vere expected to produce
strictly what was needed for their 0\\"11 subsistence. in this way further reducing
the cost of their own reproduction.
1
By reducing unit labour costs in comparison with '''age labour. sharecrop-
ping must have initially appeared to the planters as the most appropriate sub-
stitute for slave labour. The incentive element must have seemed a satisfactory
substitute for the coercion which made slaves work. The question was not
merely to fi11 the potential gap in labour supply. but to do so in a profi.table
wa.y.
Immigrants. however. \\'er,e fr,ee workers. As sharecroppers. they \vere in
principle free to decide on labour intensity and the allocation of labour. Their
dHigence and productivity in cofTee thus depended on their own appraisal of
returns.
Pl:anters and immigration agents sougha to create the illusion that
immigrants would quickly be able to repay their debts and acquire their own
land. Jn: however .. immigranls usually had to wait for at least two
years before receiving si1gnificant returns for their efTorts. The to \Vhich
they were entitled from the first harvest took almost another year to be paid
of delays in the marketing of cofTee:. but. since the contracts stipulated
that half of the workers' annual earnings from coffee were to be withheld to
cover their debts. and in the meantime they had accumulated ne\".' debts from
further advances. only in the third year could they expect to rcceive much
cash.n H is hardly surprising that t.he immigrants gre\ilt increasingly discon-
tented.
The 1856 revolt remained an isolated event.n The rnajority of the
immigrants reacted in a lless dramatic but at the sarne time morc insidious
manner by systematically restricting output in cofTee cultivation. Planters soon
grew concemed about thc immigrants' Im'>' productivity in cofTcc. As late as
11870. an emissary of the Imp,erial govcrnment noted that 'most plantations are
not yet in a conditi1on to frce labour cven undcr the sharecropping
systcm .. maJinly when workers already start out burdened ':vith a dcbt ... The
transportation arc cxccssivc and conscqucrHly thc labourcrs sharc is
insignificant ... The dclay in thc salc of cofTec forccs the '''orkcrs to '"''ait ovcr
eight months for paymcnt ... A.s a ,conscqucncc. thc vllOrkcrs gencrally tcnd a
reduccd numbcr of coffc,c trccs. w pinnt food crops to supply thcir
homcs and covcr thcir nccds. in addition to obtaining irnmcdiMc hcncfit. Yct it
i1s cvi1dcnt that this systcm cannol. bc advantagcous for thc pllantcr. whosc main
intcr,cst is
Thc initial dcht. cn:n '''ithout arhitrary additional dinicultics crcatcd by thc
anr cfl'ort hy thc v;orkcrs in cofTcc cultivatim1
what ... ,,..as stricfly ncccssary. 1\s anothcr ohscrvcr rcmarkcd: 'Thcy lthc
lahourcrs I nh:;md.on l.hc trccs. which as a rcsult dn not prouucc hut
dctcrinratc, am.l ehe plantcr is dcprivcd not. only nf his sharc in thc product hut
allso nf 1.hac of thc \l.hich is thc only sourcc of amortisation I of thc
hc

Thc contract lieft opcn l.hc numhcr of cofl\cc trccs l.o hc tcndcd by a farnily
176
Sharecropping and Sharecroppers
and the size oftbeir subsist,enc,e plot Bothofthese dements wen.! initiaUy left to
the decision of the labourers themselves. This made it possible that. as
immigrants became unint,er,ested in repaying their debts within the e.xpected
time, they increasingly diverted their labour to food crops whose returns
accrued to them directly and immediately .. Although many obsenr,ers remarked
on the alleged laziness and lack of interest of the immigrants.
36
in fact what
happened was an ahemativ,e aBocation of .labour to food crops. rather than an
absolute underuse of labour capacity.
37
Most of the immigrants in the early 1850s were members of the rural or
urban poor who were driven by the severe economic crisis i.n Central Europe to
abandon their home country, in many cases as a maUer of sheer survivaL What
they probably initially hoped for was to make a s,ecure lliving.
311
Since t.he condi-
tions they encountered in Sio Paulo rnade it almost impossible for them to
obtain a profit from work in cofTee. they preferred to dedicate a significant part
of their efforts to food crops. As a result, productivity in cofTee was low. As
Carvalho de Moraes quite appropriately observed. 'lhe planters were at the
mercy of the colonos'.
39
'
Th,e pJanters' power to controli labour and enforce a satisfactory Ievei of
productivity in coffee cultivation was limited by the circumstances under whi:ch
free .la.bour had be,en introduced .. that is. in the abs,enc,e of a local res,erve of
labour and under arrangements which required that irnmigrants repay their
costs of passage and initia.l setdement to their em.ployers. Planters presumably
thought that the incentive element contained in sharecropping would effectively
rep,Jace market forces in reducing wage costs. However. the initial debt
cancelled out the incentive demen1t. and the planten) lackcd any efTectiv,e means
of forcing their workers to produce coffee. The threat of dismissaL whkh is the
usual form of persuasion us.ed by employers to ,enforcc labour contracts. was
ha.rdlly practical since it have meant the partial or total loss of the
plant,en' investment. Ahhough it was true that the immigrants coulld not lcgally
abandon the pliantation until they had paid ofT their debts. ncither could the
planters make tbem work beyond what the llabourcrs themsclves wcrc willing to
do. Even the use of state power. as i1n the c;as.c of the lbkaba rcvollt. was of Utc
avait The J,eaders of the revolt were expelled. but tho:->e who rcmaincd did not
work any harder. .. The use o:f extra-contract.ual mcans to amortisc thcir i:rwest.-
ments had bac.kfiredl: im. is i1ncontesUtbl,e th;t,t the planten;, whcn thc lahoun:rs
wou:ld work. cou:ld not enforce thc fulfi:llmcnl. of thcir obligatirms a.ndl lhus
surfered harm from the mi1streat.ment of their coffe,c trccs. thc rcducti1on of thc
harvest. a.nd the total or partiall loss of thcir
THE LAFIOUR-LEASING CONTRJ,.CT
By thc late 1850s. plantcrs faced a dillcmrna. b.;nnnmi.c ilnccnl:i\'C:Ii had railcdl lo
prrodu,ce thc cxpectcd rcsuhs: a n:asonab1lc lc\'cl of productivity and arno:rtisn
tion of debt within thc cxpcctcd time. After Ul5 7 thc shnrccro'pJli111Ji! sy:'i.Ccm W;\tS
gr.aduaUy abandoncd in Sao Pa.ulo. Frcc lahour. howcvcr. hy nn mcans
di1sappea.rcd. Whilc thc numbcr of i1mmiJ;trtmnto; Cr1f.tllf.!Cd in coffc,c cuhivation did
So Paulo Coffee Plantarions 177
not increase during the next t,\.0 decades. it declined only slowly. Reports
reaching Europe on the immigrants' hardships eventually persuaded both the
Swiss and Prussian governments to take severe measures which practically
halt,ed emigration from the two countries to Sao Paulo.
41
Nevertheless. in 1870
it was ,estimated that approximately 3.000 free labourers - some of them
Brazilians- still work,ed on the plantations. a dedine of about 500 since 1860.
and the debate over possible solutions to the labour problern had not abated.n
Many planters continued to explore alternative labour systems and to devise
instilutional safeguards they hoped would allo'"'' a more effective
enforcement of contracts. In order to deal with the related problems of control
of productivity and arnortisation of debt. planlers initiallv resorted to contract
changes. Sharecropping \vas gradually replaced by a labour-leasing contract
[ locat;iio de sen-iros ]. Instead of a share of the val!ue of production. labourers
were henceforth paid a pre-established piecerate for each measure of coffee
produced. It ,:vas argued that by thus reducing uncertainty over income and
eliminating long delays in payrnent. labourers \\ould feel encouraged to apply
thems,elves with g.reater diligence to coffee

In addition .. the dause
that surplus food production be shared with the planter was generally dropped.
and increasingly the size of the food plot was fixed and/or Iet against a rent in
an attempt to discourage immigrants from div,erting labour to food crops.H
Moreover. free llabourers no Ionger participated in coffee processing. either
directliy or through a fee. This task reverted to slaves until the 1880s. when it
was then carried out by wage llabour. Significantly.. it '''as this part of coffee
production. together with transportation. which were rapidly mechanised in the
earl)' 1870s as sllave labour became i.ncreasingly problematic.
Labour-saving Innovations. however. \vere not introduced in coffe,e cultiva-
tion. Mechanisation of the harvcst was not technically feasible. and the
mechanisation of weeding by the use of a cultivator would have severely upset
labour demand throughout the agricultural year. Mechanised weeding would
nave either produccd idlc labour during thc cultivati,on period. or a shortage for
the harvest i1n a situation of gcneral scarcity of fme
Thc llabour-llcasing ,contract. continucd thc v..-agc inccntivc systcm. but it still
could not assurc an adcquatc Ievei of productivity becausc it did not rcsolve thc
basic problern of dcht as a disinccntivc to incrcascd productivity in cofTcc.
Plla,ntcrs. i:n fact. feit thcy also nccdcd additional l.cgal powcrs lo protcct thcm-
5.cllvcs agai:nst thc non-fulfilllmcnt of conlracts and spccifkally thc non-payment
of dcht.u'
Somc atlcmpl.s had hccn madc carllicr lo prosccutc immigrants for non-
of dchls. Howcvcr. thc law rcgulatilng sharccropping "''as largcly
inciTcc,ivc. It plantcrs only to rcscind thc crmtract or dcmand
for da.magcs: 'lhc formcr implicd loss of thc immigrants' dcht. and
thc lauer incrcn.scd thc dcht '''ithout. hnvcvcr. prmiding mcans which obl.igcd
lahourcrs to work. to p.ay fnr it.
4
'
Occasi:onalll)'. planlcrs also tricd to apply to sharccropping a lav .. of 7
lahour Ieasing contracts. Accnnling t.o this law. any lahourcr vd10.
hccn disrnisscd, did not pay his outstanding dcbt. could bc jailcd and
178
Sharecropping and Sharecroppers
condemned to public works until he had paid up. In cas,e of abandonment of
the plantation, he was t.o be arrested immediatdy and not released until his
debts had been paid.
48
However, the applicability of this law to sharecropping
had proved uncertain.
49
' Thus, a further rea.son for planters to prefer the labour-
Ieas.ing contract was surely their desire to avaH themsel.ves of the mor,e severe
penal sanctions contained in the 18371abour-leasing law.
However, there is l.itde evidence that even the 1837 law v.as ever widely
applied. The contracts had not usually stipulated a fixed period for the amor-
tisation of debt and,. in any cas,e, the of the law to press for repayment did
not secure the planters' primary objective... which was to adeve g.reater
productivity of .labour in coff:ee .. As Jong as the immigrants were willing to
remain on the then: was little the planters could do to make them
work, short of outright coercion, they knew could produce untoward
results.
Productivity in coffee continued tobe low.
50
A survey offamilies resident on
the plantation Martyrios in 1869. tlle property of Senator Frandsco Antonio
de Souza Quelroz, was published by Carvalho de Moraes. Labour,ers wer,e con-
tracted under the 1abour-leasing sy:stem. llH;: survey contains data on size and
composition of the famiJi,es and number of coffee trees tended by each. \N'ith
tbese data it is possible to ,cakullate the number of tr,ees cuhivated per family
and per labourer by the con:sumer/worker ratio of the famHy.
NUMBER OF COFFEE TREES TENDED PER FAMELY AND INDlVIDlif\L
LABOURER BY CONSUMER/WORKER RATIO OFTHE FAI\HLY: PLt-\NT!\TION
MARTYRIOS.
c/w ratio
trees
tended
number of
families
1.0-1.4
per per
family work.er
2.109
56()
I I
LS-1.9 2.0 and over
per per pcr per
family
"'orkcr
fr11mily worker
2.071 709 1.940 SlJ
7 5
Source: Carvalho de Monu:s .. op. cit.. appcmlix 17.. Thc fact lhal. \\ith
incrcas.inglly more fa\;.oura.hlc ratins I 1.0 1.4) thc
number of t.re,es lended per famiJiy incn::a:o;;.,cs .1\omcwhal i.'i dm:: to thc facl
thal. those famil'ies generally ,cnntaim;d a ah .. olutc rwrnhcr uf
workers.
The avcrage numbcr of coflcc lrec."i l:Uici\nh::d hy nnc lahourcr varicd frrun
.566 t.o 813 trccs. Morcovcr. l.hc h1rgcr l',hc prnduct.in:- ..:.ap:Kity ol" thc fanly
(famiJics with a c/w rnlio hetwc,cn 1.0 and I A). ein: M111alkr lhc numht:r or IFCl's
by each l!ahourcr in il. The ovcrall prPdtu.:titm i1nh:lll'iity per l!ahourcr h1
c.offee was llow, whcn cn.mparcd lo thc usual of 2JMlO hl
2 .. 500 tn!cs, tendcd from the II H90s onv..nnl hy l.i.ho wen: al.'io prmhu:
So Paulo CojJee Plantations 179
ing food crops at the same time. According to the 869 statistics. those families
which had the comparatively largest productive capacity. exerted themselves
],east in coiTee cultivation.
In addition. the of work appears to have deteriorated under the
labour-leasing contracL Such a system of remuneration not only affects labour
intensity. but may also have consequences for the care with which tasks are
executed. In general. piecewerk is not used for many agricultural tasks because
the quality of ''rork suiTers. There is evidence that under the Jabour-leasing
contract. while the immigrants keen on harvesting as much cofTee as
possible. they tended to be negligent in the ,,eedings or abandoned outright
part of the trees once they had been harvested. =
1
In effect. neither contract changes nor the use of more severe labour laws
succe,eded in creating a satisfactory labour force because these measures failed
to resolve the basic problern: the initial investment planters had to make to
introduce free l:abour. Heavily burdened by their initial debts. immigrant
Jabourers continu,ed to nork little in coiTee and were troublesome.
THECOLONATO
Those planters who still \vorked their plantations with free labourers by the late
1860s gradually introduced further adjustments in the labour

While
contracts initially had contained fines for abandoning the plantation before the
worker's debt had been repayed. thcy nov.' increasingly stipulated fines for the
non-execution of weedings. As one planter noted. us the only advantage of
slav,es is i1n discipline .. and once a plantcr wants to rcnouncc a l:ittle control and
patiently bears the faults of the colonos. he \.vill gradually succeed. by means of
th,e fincs contai,ncd in thc contracts. in making all colonos submit to rcgular
work.''
3
Food plots werc now rcgularly assigned in proportion to thc numbcr
of trecs tcndcd by thc famiil)'. Finally. some plaTHcrs bcgan lo introduce a ne\v
form of rcmuncration. a mixcd task and piecerate systcm. the colonato. an
arrangcment which was to pr,cvail on thc cofTcc plantations from the l880s
until thc J, 950s .. Undcr this systcm. co!Tcc wecdings vrerc paid at a nxed annual
rate pcr thousand trccs t,cndcd and thc harvcst at a picccrntc.
By paying a separate st.ipulatcd rate for ,.,ccdings. a sorl of fixed-rninirnum
which guarantccd thc lahourcrs a stahlc incomc indcpcndcnl of cofTcc
yiclds. it could hc ,cxp,cctcd l.hat workcrs ,,.ould non ncglcct t.hc coiTcc grovcs
outside of thc harvcst scason. Jn addi.lion .. sincc part of thc labourcrs
rcrnuncrat.ion undcr thc nrw contracl dcpcndcd dircctly on thc numhcr of trccs
tcndcd and: no Ionger nn thci.r yiclds. il. could hc :1ssumcd t hat thcy woulcl fccl
tn cultinHc a largcr numhcr nf trccs. By rnaintaining thc piecerate
systcrn for thc hancst. howcvcr. lahour costs could still hc adaptcd to annual
nuctuati,OI1S in yilclds. Morcovcr. unit lal"'l'Ollf costs could bc Jowcrcd through
intcnsil!h.:ation of ciTon on thc part nf thc immigrants family at thc time ,,hcn
lahour dlcmand '"'as ..
By l.hc latc I HM>s. hov,,rcvcr. thcrc was a growing awarcncss among planten;.
thal :tdjustm1:nts :md lhc c..xisting labnur law.s wcrc insuffkicnt in
thcrn'-it:lvcs lo :tssurc :1 and profitable frec lahom l"orcc. Thc dccadc
180
Sharecropping and Sharecroppers
of the l870s began amid predictions of an impending labour crisis. both in
terms of future supply and of labour control. Plantcrs attempted to deal with
the situation in several ways .. Many continued to introduce free labour on a
limited though privately sponsored schemes had lost most of their
appeaJ.56 Moreover,. planters faith in this system of immigration \vas further
shaken by a new outbr,eak of labour conftict on some plantations run with free
labour.
57
At the same time abolitionist agitation was growing. especially after
the ] 868 Manifesto of the Liberal Party which callcd for an end to slavery.
Pressure thus mounted for a comprehensiv,e solution to the labour problem.
Nevertheless, coffee production dur1ng the 18 70s expanded to almost t\vice
what it had been in the previous decade.
58
In fact. planters were still able to
postpone until 1888 the efTective end of slavery. They ternporarily solved the
anticipated llabour shortage by generallly rationalising cotTee production. They
managed to disarm the abolitionists with a very limited concession: the Rio
Branco law of 187] which declared that children born thereafter of slave
mothers were to be free.
59
Planters al.so continued to purchase substantial
numbers of slaves from the Rio de Janeiro reg1on and from northern Brazil.'
110
The great expansion of railroads. almost aiJIIocated in the areas.
which took place in the 1870s also helped postpone an acutc labour shortage.
The availability of railroad transport allowed plant,ers to reassign to othcr tasks
the sl
1
aves they have previously had to use in transporting thcir crop to
market.
61
Moreover, by lowering the cost of transportation and rcclucing the
darnage the crop suiTered en route. the railroad helped compcnsatc thc pl<mters
to some ext,ent for pnssible rises in the cost of slave labour.
The introduction of J:abour-saving machinery in thc cofTee industry \\ras
another import.ant element in forestalling thc crisis."
2
Jose Verguciro perhaps
best exemplified the spirit shown by the more astute plantcrs whcn hc rcmarkcd
in 1874 that 'saving labour is the prindpal objective which wc must always
hav,e in mind since. if time is money. the saving of labour is also:"J
Coffee production on the pllantations run by slavc labour. still thc !arge
majority, became generally more rational. As onc S5to Paulo official pul it.. not
only had the introduction of machinery 'profitably rcpllaccd a good part of thc
work force', but 'the direction of thc workcrs has bccomc morc intelligent. (lnd
the divi:sion of labnur has bcen put into practicc .. ",J
Although Sao Paulo planters mamaged to copc with thcir lahour nccds quitc
successfully during thc period. thcy did not hy any mcans nhandon thc
question of how to organisc thc supply of frcc

Thc issuc of ncgotial.ing
the transiti!On from slavery to frcc lah<nlr hccamc incrca:'\ingly urgent It ""'<I$
the old problcm: BrazH 'posscsscs thc hcst climat.c in lhc "'orld. altnnst all ehe
precious metals and a prodigiously fcrtilc soiL hut Iacks populali1on and fnr thal
. .","
rcason 11s poor.
At the .1878 Agricultural Congrcs:"i, callcd hy l.hc govcrnmcnl ln thc
gencral! statc of agriculturc. onc group of plantcrs sc:dc i:rnmigr:1
tion as a solution t.o thc labour problern hcc:tusc of i1ts to or to
thc country. Thcy demandcd. insl.c:ul. law.s to comhat thc avcrsiun nf
the local population to work. Thcy .rncans of di.'ici,pl.ininJZ lJ.l:rtgm/o.;; aml
So Paulo Coffee Plaflfations 18]
of forcing v:ork from ingenuos. as vrell as provisions to tighten the 183 7 lav ..
regulating labour-leasing

In the end this position \vas to be over-

ruled by those planters belie,ed that reliance on former slaves after Aboli-
or on the available Iocal population. to CO\"er their labour needs would be
highly problematic .. and v,rho sa\\' in subsidised mass immi2.ration the onJy
possible solution. But before this lauer group fi nally in forcing
state to assume full responsibility for mass immigration. the government made
a last attempt to relegate this task to the planters themseiYes by grarlting them
some additional legal powers to control labour. In response to those planters
who wer,e pressing for more stringent labour furth,er legal proYisions \vere
passed to discipline the increasingly unruly free labourers. 1 n 18 79. the 183 7
labour-leasing law was replaced by a new regulation coYering both labour-
1easing and sharecropping contracts and providing prison sentences not only
for abandoning the plantation \\ithout just cause but also for strikes and incite-
m,ent of others to slrike through threats or the usc of \iolence.
68
This law \vas surely not l1east the result of renewed outbreaks of labour
unrest on some plantations. Almost simultaneously the Agricultural
Congress. the Tyrolean labourers on the plantation Salto Grande in Amparo.
owned by Joaquim Bonifacio do Amara!. declared a much publicised strike.
69
The labourers began their mo,.,ement eH thc onset of the co!Tee harvest in
protest over a number of abuses and omissions of vvhich they feit they had been
the victims.
70
Jt vvas feared that thc snike might spread to other cstates.
Although thc planter made a ccrtain number of concessions. such as raising the
piecerate from 500 reis per alqueire of co!Tee har\'estcd to 600 reis. and
agreei1ng to chargc interest on outstanding dcbl only aftcr two years. thc
labourers could not bc pcrsuadcd to resumc work. Thc owner then stopped
providing foodstufTs. a wcU-known rncans of forcing Jabourers back to work.
and at thc samc time had the Ieadcrs prosecutcd and condcmncd to prison
for non-fulfillmcnt flf cnntract und er t.he 183 7 law. These cYents
secm to h:1vc cnnvinccd such a staund1 dcfcnder of priYatcly sponsorcd
immigration as Anuu.rd 0f thc urgent nccd for subsidiscd mass immig.ration.
ahhough hc slil:l insist.cd that morc sc\crc laws to cnforcc contracls .. ,crc
cquaHy ncccs.sary.':
Othcr So Paulo planten. in contrast. hccamc incrcasingl) cmphatic about
thc nccd for lhc lihcr:llisatinn of labnur cnntracts amilegal rcforms as indispcn-
sahllc prcrcquisitcs fnr a succcssful prngrarnrnc of g:o,crnmcnt-sponsorcd
imrnigration. \Vhich thcy rcgardcd as lhc only solution to thc prnhlcm.
Thc rclativdy low cnfTcc priccs nf thc carly I HHOs. and t hc difficultics plantcrs
faccd in s'l:curing crcdit, actcd further dctcrrcnl s ln pri,atcly sponsorcd
sincc thcy kft many unablc or unwillin12. to <Hhancc
to
1
On thc olhcr hand. lhe I :-\7
1
) law was largcly
incffcclin: and ('\Til counh;r prodtn:tivc. /\s 1\ntonin Pradn .. Olll' nr lhc lllOSt
prmnincnl S:io Paulo plarl!cr" nntcd. immi!,':rants in jail weH ncithcr rcpaying
thc pl.an!crs' loans nor harn:slinJt! thcir co!lcc .. :md in addition thc law onh
scrvcd to discrcdi1l Hratilian colonisation in Europc. Pradn further
l.hal. thl l;aw \t,rmld ;nnn hccorm: unncccssary in any Cl"L'. at least in S;io Paulo.
182
Sharecropping and Sharecroppers
since the Assemb]y ofthat province bad approved a measure in .1884 proriding
free passage for immigrants who went into agriculture. ,_.
by this point were aware that 'it is impossibJ,e to have IO\'-'
salaries, without violence,. if there are few workers and many people 1.vho wish
to employ them.'
75
The way out of this dilemma . and the essence of the So
immigration system, was explained by another member of the Chamber
of Deputies shortly after Abolition: ']t is evident". he said .. 'thal \ve need
labourers ... in order to increase the compeon among them and in that way
saJari,es wil1 be Jowered by mea.ns of the law of supply and demand."
76
As ]ong as coffee plantations Could be run predominantly wmth slave labour.
it was diffku1t to secure state-subsidised irnmigration on a large scale.
Howev,er, by the early 1880s Abolition dearly had become unavoidable. and a
comprehensive solution had to be found. The Sto Paulo power
in the government had been increasing steadily. then finally succeeded in
imposing their solution to the labour problem. Although more than two years
a.nd several important modifkahons of the law providing for subsidised
Immigration were before the system functioned sati:sfactorily.. Prado
was in affirming that the problern had be,en solved by the
mid-l880s. After ] 884., the state, instead of coercing labourers directly. sought
to achieve the same ob)ective- cheap and obedient labour for the plantations-
by ftooding the labour market with subsidised immigrants.
By 1886 the provincial had found an way to provide
subsirlies immigrants. and the effect was almost immedi,ate. By
May of 1887, some 60,.000 to 70.000 immigranls. by now predominantly
lta]ian, had aJready be,en placed in the agricultural of Sao
Paulo.
77
This figure exceeds the estimated 50.000 slaves who werc bcing used
on Sao P'aulo pllantations in 188.5.
711
Immigration pol
1
,icy remained essentiallly unchanged unlil thc First World
War. Between ] 884 and 19 J 4 .. some 900,000 immigrants arrivcd in So Paulo.
mos,Uy as chea.p labour for the coffee plantati:ons. The immigration progrmnme
alll'owed S.o Paullo planters not onlly to abol
1
ish sl!avcry with only moderate
inco,nvenience but the - aided by at least initially high priccs-
created the condi1tions for susta.ined cxpansion of coffcc production. Betwccn
1888 and 1902 the number of cofTe,e tre,es pllantcd in Sao Paulo incrcascd frorn
221 miUion to 685 miUion.
79
Subsidlised mass immi:gra'i.iiOn and c.hc crcation or an cffcctivc capita.li:st.
llabour ma.rk.et se,emed to :soJv,e both of thc di:fficultics pllanlcrs had prcviously
encountered with free labour- thc debt and labour di:sci:pllinc. Sincc pl;uHcrs rn1
Ionger had to advance pa.ssage mom!y to <lind wcrc assurcd uf an
abundance of fielldhands by thc t.hc I R79 law fcll i:nto disusc and ,,.;1s
finaJlly in .1890 lhc tnnst slrongly
demanded by thc pn:scnt state of thc counl.ry i.!ii thc w it sim:c
public wealth develops in direct proporti:nn: lrJ fh,c incrcasc in pupulal.ion. J'n
order to attract sufficienl numbers of immigra.nts '!lihruncfur II.J\\, of I H 79
needed to be ahoHshed. Conlrac:ts hcnccfort.h .li.hnulld hc 'acl.' uf pure convcn
on based on mutual whi,ch cllc\atc thc hd1uurcr to lhc cal.cttory of
So P'm1lo Coffee Plantalions
183
partner in the contract.'
80
The 1879 law. howeYer. bad not only senred to
enforce contract fulfiUment. but also prohibited strike action. Among other
liberal reforms of the period was one replacing the t 8 79 pro\'isions with a
decree on so-called 'nimes against the freedon:: of work which penalised the
indting of either labourers or employers to increase or reduce \\ork or wages
through the use ofthreats or violence.
81
Contract enforcement and labour discipline were henceforth to depend on
the mechanism of the rnarket. Planters did indeed employ coercion and
viollence under certain circumstances to keep labourers on the plantations and
extract profit.. but in general they to deal \.li;ith the problem of keeping
down labour costs by increasing supply. Extra-economic coercion. which was
at times substantiaL sen'ed essentially to impro,e the planters bargaining
position in the labour markeL
Even after the 1880s. planters regularly claimed that there ,,as a shortage of
agricultural labour in Sao Paulo. There are .. hm11;ever. a number of indications
that these laments were for the most part debating points to press for continued
mass immigration so as to assure abundant labour at the lo'"'' wages the
planters wanted to pay. For one. the t,,.o alternative sources of labour. the
fre,edmen and so-caHed national labour ,,ere nevcr tapped in any substantial
way before the First \\forld War. when subsidised European immigration
became impratical. Both these g.roups werc largely ig.nored by the planters even
during allcged labour
Moreovcr. agricultural \\ages varicd little between 1884 and I 914. At the
end of the century. with fall:ing cofTee pri.ces. thcre was even a decline. followed
between 1902 and 1910 by a moderate risc duc to the relatively srnall number
of immigrants cntering So Paulo and thc h1rgc number of departures. This was
countered. howevcr. by an j,ncrcase in in1migration in 1912 and 1913 so that by
1914 moncy '"'agcs were back to about the same lc\"CII they had bcen in the mid-
1880s. In thc same pcriod real incomc of the labourcrs secms to have dcclincd
significantlly .
11
J
Evcn at thc b"cginning of this ccntury .. \\.hcn complaints O\'Cr labour short-
agcs bccarnc particularly vchcment..
11
.. thcrc docs not sccm to have bccn an
absolute scarcity. Such propagandawas to somc cxtcnt a rcaclion by plantcrs
to a 902 halian han on suhsidiscd immigration which was cvadcd in parl
and ofTsct hy thc intrnduction of Portugucsc and Spanish lahourcrs. Howcvcr.
planten; in t.hc oldcr coiTcc rcgions did facc difficuhics in compcting for lahour
with ncwcr rcgiom al a titnc of dcdining cofTcc priccs. and al thc wage Ievels
thcy wen: \'ltilling to o'ITcr.
11
" An indication nf thc duhious nature of Lhc plantcrs
comphtints is thc facl that nci.thcr \li.'as thc suggcstinn tn cut 20 pcr ccnt of
thc t:nffcc trccs so as tn incn:asc l:1hnur supply cn.:r hccdcd nor. as far as wc
know. did cofrcc cvcr unharvcstcd for Iack nf Intcrcstingly. it was
in t.his contcxl :lluH n n:turn tn sharccroppin!! was J."'roposcd. which turncd out
to hc unfc;1;.,iblc. lahourcrs. 'fcaring a further dcdinc in priccs.
and ,."nrk ,,.ith lixc'll rcsull.s. rcjcct sharccropping . ] nslc:HJ. plantcrs in
thc oldcr arcas incrcasingly allo\\'cd food crops to hc p.rown hctwccn thc rows
of coffcc in ordcr to aUr;u:' lal:)<lllr.
1
'"
184
Sharecropping and Sharecroppers
ln dfect, the massive inftux of immigrants covered labour needs quite
satisfactorily before 1914. Not only did subsidis,ed mass immigration
drastically reduce initia] labour costs, but planters were now to make
only minor advances for and agricultural tools. In addition. the
disappearance of the burden of the initial heavy debt.. coupJ,ed stricter
regulation of work and fines for non-execution of tasks. no"v possible to enforce
because of the abundant labour supply. produced a marked increase in labour
productivity in coffee. By the late ] 880s the average nurnber of coffee trees
tended by an adult man ranged belwe,en 2.000 and 3.000. \Nhik wornen usually
cultivated halfthat number.
119
Planters continued contracling immigrant l
1
abour under the mixed task and
piecerate .system coupled with subsistence production. The contract \vas now
annual. Even with an abundant labour supply. the colonato system continued
to be more profitab]e than straight wage labour for a number of reasons. Food
prices were persistently high foodstuffs were to a !arge extent importedas
a consequence of the planters' a]most exclusive interest in coffce ..
90
As the pres-
ident of the province noted in 1887: 'Corfe,e gives the best returns .... it wou.ld
be an error to disdain i1t in order to something else.''n
Food plots acted as an incentive for the l'abourers. at the sametime reducing
the cost of the reproduction of labour. Moreover. since food crops "vcrc gro'"''"
during the coffee cultivation season when labour demands were comparatively
l:ower, the p]anters could make full use of the i,mmigrants family labour
throughout the year. As one obsenrer noted i,n 1908. 'what rcally enables
the immigrants to make meet are the crops they ha.vc the right to raise on
their own account'
92
Bonardelli in 1916 estimated that food crops grovm by
made up one third of their income.
9
J Thc right l.o grow food crops
rather than constituting a payment in kind or a mcans of fixing labour.. was
primarily a way of extracting a .l:abour rent in addit.ion to thc surplus produccd
in corfee cultivation.
94
The combination of cash crops v.ith suhsistencc culltiva-
tion was potentiaUy problematk for economic dcvclloprncrH in gcncraL and for
the planters themselves - as late as 1922 plantcrs thc nccd to restriet
food crops since 'the 1andowner cannot permit that plant cxtcmdn;:ly
in when labour is lacking for cultivation. ""< Howcvcr. if
effectively controllied. and as long as coffcc was highly prnfil ::.bl'c .. thc mrangc-
ment was cllearly advantageaus for the phmtcrs.
A .final way the pllanters dcviscd to rcducc unit l11hour cnc.;ts was thcir
growing preference. not only for famiJ,i,es. but fpr I;Hgc f amilics. ix. unit.s
iaining at least three workcrs.'
1
'"' A l!arge numhcr of wnrkcr.-; in a nwdc it
possible to depress wage cosl.s furthcr. Thc wnrkcrs pcr consurm:r in a
famHy. thc lower thc cost of rcprodluction of c;u.:h imli,idual \1\orkcr and consc
the lowcr the could hc.q
7
Thc,re seems liulc douht. l.hcrcforc. that fnr mm.:h of l.hc pcrini.l bcl"'-ccn I KH.:I
and 1914 coffce planting was a. profi1tahlc Fvcn aftcr II XW1 '":hcn
coffee pri1ccs startcd to dcdinc on ac(:ount of P'vcr .. n.:as1Hlahly vrcll
run plantations wcrc still rcturning a
This was possihlc. howcvcr .. an incn:;asc in lhc rate Df cxploil ation as
So Paulo CojJee Plantalions 185
weil as various frauds.
99
Most ltalian observers at the time agreed on the
extremely poor working and living conditions of immigrant labourers.1oo
P'lanters. for their part. usually claimed that 'the crisis' at the turn of the
had forced them to treat their labourers the wav thev did.
101
... - - - ... ...
The planters power increased in direct proportians to the grmving
powerlessness of the labourers. Almost all plantations had their_ band of
capangas. armed guards in eh arge of carrying out the will of the planter and of
controlling among other things the entrance and departure of labourers.
Planters occasionally to retain their labourers by such means as
artificially delaying the end of the agricultural year when the final financial
accounts were setHed. thus making it unlikely that the labourer 'could find
work on another plantation where cultivation for the next crops had already


Nevertheless. the mobility of labour was generally considerable.
Some 40 to 60 per cent of the labourers left their plantation year.
103
Planters exercised extensive control over their labourers. in itself an expression
of their abiding fear of indiscipline or worse. Observers sometimes remarked on
the colonos' 'submissiveness. respectful and docile" behaviour. although this
was oft,en more apparent than reaL Hl.s
The obstades to more than spnradic individual resistance \vere immense.
and planters did what they could to suppress any expression of discontent. For
examp],e. all societies or associations of labourers \vere prohibited.
105
Yet
despite severe control. not only were individual often turbulent and
sometimes violent.. but strikes occurred with some frequency.
106
Labourers acng individually or nearly so quitc regularly out acts of
vioknce against plantcrs and overseers. One of the most farnaus instances.
though by no means atypical!. occurred in 1901 when Francisco Augusto
Almeida Prado .. a plantcr belanging to thc promi.nent Prado famil!y. was so
careless as to strolll through his coiTec Helds onc day without the protection of
his bodyguards. Scveral of his labourers took advantage of thc situation and
him. riddling his body k nifc v,ounds .. and chopping it into pieces
with their and hocs. Diogo Sallcs. thc hrotllcr of thc Presidcnt of the
Rcpublic. was murdcrcd in 1900 by a labourcr for aHcrnpting to rapc the mur-
derer\ This was an indi,.idual! motivc. but. it is as much indicative of thc
extreme form:"i. cxploitation tonk .. as of thc undcrlyi.ng tcnsi1ons. Other incidcnts
arosc frorn somcwhat hroadcr issucs. In thc Prado rnurdcr. thc immediate
causc was said tn h,c thc punishmcnt hc had irnposcd on his labourcrs for
rcfusilllJ!. to put nut a firc on thc cstal.c of nnc of his rclatives.
1
o;
CoUcctivc ac:tion ,,as ahn not infrcqucnL Thc fir.st st.rikcs aftcr Abolition
occurrcd i1n thc carly 1 M90s. and thc Halian-languag.c daily Fm!(ulfn rcgistcrs
dozcn hy llJ I): from 'I. hat yc::u tn 19JO. thc Patmna/0 Agn(ola (a statc
and thc lahour providc tn O\'cr a hundred strikcs on
thc coffcc plantalions.
11111
Most sud1 strikcs wrrc limitcd to thc houmlarics nf
(mc plantation. in 191 I ahoul. 1.000 Iabnurcrs strucl\ on half a dozcn
plantal:i,lms in thc arra of for l\li.crl! y days and sccurcd a slig.ht
j
1
r1crcasc in pa.y. Thc ycar. lahourcrs nn mnrc t han a do1.cn planta
1i1ons in thc Prcto arca wcnt on strikt and also sccurcd a small wage
186
Sharecropping and Sharecroppers
The Iargest of the period took place in the sa.me area in 1913. h
mobilised between 10,000 and 15.,000 labourers,. but resulted in a total defeat
S,tfik,es were generaJJy carried out in an to secure an increase in v.rages. or
in opposition to such measur,es as the non-payment of wages.. auempts to
reduc'e sa]aries, heavy and arbitrary discipline and fines. or restrictions on the
planting of food crops.
109
From the beginn:ing., the relations between planters and free labourers were
fraught with and generaUy rather explicit tensions. Even had the planters
desired to paternalistic re1aons of personal dependence - and the
point remaitns undear - a number of elements limited the ready use of such
arrangements to obscure exploitation and discourage Not only
So Paulo plantations large, but the work force was both new and foreign-
born, thus depriving the planters of many of the traditional sanctions -
re)]gjous and otherwise- which rund ruling classt!S have oHen enjoyed.
As a.s sharecropping prevailed, struggJe between labourers and planters
around the share in net profit from coffee. Exceptionally. labourers
revo1ted, but. more generally they resisted by withdrawing labour from cofTee
cultivation. As as food growing was not subject to syslematic restraints.
the labourers were able,. without jeopardising their own survival:. to deprive the
planters of part of their power. This does not mean .. however. that
labourers reduced their expectations. What they did was to divert a significant
part of their productive capadty to growing. beyond \\'hat they required
for subsistence. Though essentially individuaL these actions were in
determining the of the liabour system.
The transition frorn sharecropping to the mixed task and piecerate
the co/o.nato,, was a process of incn:!asingly systemati1c expl
1
oitation of labour ..
aided after the mid-l880s by the massive importation of immigrants. Once a
capitalis.t labour market had been cr,eated. pllanting rights restrictcd to the basic
minirnum,. and increasingly severe labour disci:plinc instituted. condlitions
effe,ctilvely disappeared individual! struggJ,e at thc Ievel of \'-'Ork against what
were considered unsatisfactory returns. By lhe turn of thc ccntury immigranl
labourers consdtuted a homogem:ous mass. subjcct to morc or lcss uniformly
harsh conditions. Under normal circumstanccs thcy had thc possihi,liity of
explloiti.ng difTerenccs to their advantagc. or of ahandoning Sao P'aulo
agriculture ahog,ether either for work in BrazjJ,ian (itics or in othcr countrics.
Labour mobility a.mong plant.ations and outrighl dcparl.urcs ",,.crc considcrahlc.
But for those who remai1ned in agri1cu.U.un:. lo"' wagcs any addihonal! cxac-
tions by phm,ters. such as 1the non-paymcnl of wa!Ics. l.hc prohi1hil.irm of
g:rowing, or a reducti10n in wagcs. coukl t.riggcr off collcclivc action in ehe form
of .strikes. Contradictoril.y. hy i1ncrcasing la,hour discipllinc. plarHcrs crcatcd tl'u:
very conditi1ons for and thus pol:cntiallly much morc
acE.ion by the immigrants ..
CONCLUSTON
This i
1
s not the pllace to aucmpt n :'l.urvcy or l.hc vnst and Iiteraiure on
the his'tory of Brazili:an agriculturc. '''
0
Our corHcntion. I'Ul\ld;vcr, i:-; ftutl uf
sao Paulo Coffee Plantations
187
thes,e studi,es have t,ended to appl)' macro-models to the plantation labour
systems examined in this article rather than posing the crucial question of whv
planters opted for the various arrangements in the first place. lnsufftcient auer{-
tion has thus been paid to the decisive conditions under \.vhich free labour \\'as
lo the dynamics of the labour systems themsehes. and to the
reasons f:or their transformation.
In recent debates have continued a long dispute about the supposed
feudal. or at least non-capitalist. nature of Brazilian agriculture.
111
The implicit
point of reference for both the 'feudar and 'capitalisf interpretations is straight
wage Iabour as the characteristically capitalist form of surplus extraction.
Those who endorsed the feudal thesis emphasised the distinctive features of the
1abour systems as proof of the non-capitalist nature of Brazilian

Those who supported the capitali.st thesis generally took as their

point of referenc,e the larger economic into which Brazilian agriculture
was integrated and argued for the underlying identity between the specific
liabour systems used and wage labour. \Vhile such authors explained t.he pre-
valence of thes,e systems by their greater productivity in contrast to wage
Jabour. they still did not account for their transformations.
More recently. yet other interpretations have been proposed. From the per-
spective of capitaJ accumulation it has been suggested that labour relations in
Brazilian agriculture have benefed the accumulation of capital in industry
through relatively low prices agricultural products.. and werc thus
functional for the system.
1
P This vie,, has been cont,ested by the suggestion
that low agricultural productivity. on the contrary. has dear Iimits to
accumulation: 'The relativcly lo"'' prices of agricultu.ral products imply. in
reallity. relati1vely high "social costs and a relatively lo\v 'social
productivity".'
11
" The articulation of the tvm scctors is seen as contradictory. a
contradiction produced by thc relativdy l,m'>' Ievel of productivity in agriculturc
on account of what arc sccn as prcdominantly pre-capitalist or backward rda-
ons of productilon. Productivity in agriculture is indccd lovrer. in moncy
terms. than in industry. But agai1n "'hy plantcrs have for so long optcd for
labour systcms of lov.r producthi1ty rather than introducing morc producti,c
innovations is not cxplaincd. ll sccms rcasonahlc that plantcrs should prcfcr
Jabour-intcnsivc methods of production rather than inacasing fixcd cajJital. if
the cost of thc lauer vras highcr than that of Jahour. Butthis posits thc qucstion
of why thc cma of l11hour was so low for so long. Low agricultural v.ages irnply
a. rcstriction in thc consumption of \\:agc goods. out t.hcn why should plantcrs
he conccrncd with thaL rather than ""ith thcir 0\"-'11 Ievels of profit'? Such an
a.UitwJc has impnrtant political conscqucnccs gcncrating social tcnsions. but
capitalist dcn:lopn1cnt is h:m.Hy a harmonious proccss. Nor is its dynamic
dcl.crmin,cd hy thc ru;,cds nf c;1pital accumulation as a kiml of d(us cx maclrina
hut. as wc hil\'C aUcl'nptcd to sho\\' in tiH.: of thc coffcc plantations.
by cha,ss
These ;uc m;u;ro anallyscs. Thcrc an: also a nurnhcr of st udics speci.fically
thc firsl. c.:q'\Cri111H:nts vrith fmc llahour. most nf which cc11trc nn thc
fai1lurc of thc sh.a.n.:-croppinJ.l systcm. 1t has hccn variouslv argucd that what
188
Sharecropp.ing and Sharecroppers
condemned the early sharecropping experi.ments was in the last instance the
planters' own backwardness. It is suggested that for fme labour to be com-
parative1y as profitable as slave labour- the point of reference is slave labour-
planters resorted to forms of coercion which were unacceptable to the free
labourers who reacted by rebelling. The implicit condusion isthat planters did
not know where their true interests lay. They revealed themselves incapable of
appreciating the requirements of a contractual relationship. an incapacity
derived from their 1ong tradition as

By using coercion rather
than economic incentives! they undermined the labour system they themselves
had adopted in order to replac,e the s1aves.
These interpretations contain a mixture of elements from both the feudal and
capitalist theses. The early sharecropping system is implicitl!y interpreted as
but its failure is generally attributed to the planters traditional
ideology which ]ed them to treat labour,ers as if they were slaves.
We hav,e argued that So Paulo planters introduced free labour to replac'e or
add to their slave force becaus'e the most forward-looking of them were aware
by mid-century that some substitute for slave labour eventually had to be
found. Under these circumstances .. they w,ere wil1ing to with new
forms of labour. whose productivity th,ey initially di,d not know .. Houever. only
a minorHy of Sao Paulo planters opted for free labour at thc time. and the end
of slavery was not immediate. Thus there was no acute shortage of slavcs. and
plant,ers could continue to starr their pl:antations '"'ith slavc labour. whos,e
productivity was famiJI,iar to them. in casc free labour did not respond to their
expectations. Not only those who have studied the ,early expcriments ""'ith frce
but also the planters themsdves repeatcdly thc difficulties
wi:th free labour to its relativ,el
1
y low productivity in comparison to sla vcry .
11
f, h
may be true thal slaves were morc profitable than frcc labourcrs. hut to go
back to sl,avery was no permanent solution. Thus. to thc failurc of thc
share,cropping syst,em by its comparativcly IIO\\ICT productity \"ould bc
reasonabl1e only if i1t were no1t for th,e impcnding abolition of slavcry. Thc
spectre of abolition left planters. in fact. with only l\\"0 cithcr to
find a satisfactory substitute of frcc lalwur. or to aband<1n coffcc cultiva-
tion altogether.
The planters who ini,tially took it upon thcmsclvcs !n tllnd son1c rcplaccrncnt
for slave labour were the first of a remarkahk grrmp nf agricultural :md com-
mercial entrcpreneurs. Thei1r dccision lo rcorganisc proc.hu .. :tinn using frcc
labour is in its,clf symptomac. Thcy vi1C\"-cd lahnur :lli a cnsl aml adoplxd a
fabour system. sharc,cropping .. which thcy l.hfl'ugtH woul!rl as"illrl' !hcm a C(lsl
per uni1t of output llowcr l.han Hurt of wap:c lahour. rather than cnmpar
in.g this with slavc llahour. That somc of thcm hccilrnc di ... cnchanlcd \.\ith thc
and t,cmporari,ly n:turncd Co slavc l;;,our ,...,.:, ... duc fund:uncni:;JIIy ln
lhc ahsence of onc essential prcrcquisitc. a surplu"' of frcr.. lahour
that would havc kcpt. thcir workcrs intimidalctl and ... lo
Undcr thcsc circumstanccs. ncilthr::r thc rconomic im .. :enliw' cnulairicd in thc
sharccropping contract. nor thc rcsort to frauds aml ol:ca ..... ional cocrcion
succccdcd in assuring a prnfiltahlc and rclilahllc labnur fon.:c .. Thc
So PauJo Coffee Plantations 189
systematically restricted outpul in and/or rebelled. It is this led
some planters to conclude that 'at the cost of any sacrifke the work of a slave
is preferable to that of a fre,e man .
117
Others attempted to resolve their labour
probl'ems by introducing contract changes and more etfective labour la\.\'S. vet
with greater success. The permanent problern of labour producti,;ity
and discipl,ine was only resolved in the 1880s when the state began to subsidise
mass immigration and thus lay the foundations for an etfective capitalist labour
market.
NOTES
I. 'Bericht des schweiz. Generalkonsuls in Rio-Janeiro an den schweiz. Bundesr;:Hh ber die
Auswanderung nach Brasilien. Schll'ei.::erisches Bundesblatt. X. Jahrgang II. no. 34. 24
July 1858. pp. 183-188 .. quoting the specches of an immigration agcnt named !vlota on
behalf of emigration to Braz.il.
2. E. VioUi da Costa. 'Colnias de parceria na lavoura de cafe: primeiras expcricncias. in her
Da Monarquia Repriblica: momcntos decisiros. So Paulo. 1977: V/. Dean. Rio C/aro; a
Bra::.iliarr Plantotion System. 1820-/920. Stanford. 1976: J.S. \Vitter. 'Um cstabelecimento
agricola no estado de So Paulo nos meados do seculo X IX'. Rerisla de Historia. no. 98.
1974; S. Buarquc de Holanda. prefacc and not es to T. Da,atz. Mcmarias de um cofono no
Brasil. So Paulo. 1941.
3. T11c lmnsformation of Verguciro's plantation Jbicaba in thc first part of thc ninelccnth
cenlury is a good CJ(amplc of the evolution of Silo Paulo agriculturc. Vcrguciro had bcg:un to
replace sugar canc with cofTcc in 1828. but wcre limitcd by thc small number of
slavcs he ov.ncd. ln 1840. hc madc a first attcmrt to rcorganisc thc gradually
introducing Portugucsc to n:placc his sla\"Cs. This expcriment failed bccausc of
thc political uphcavals of 1842. Not discouragcd. howc\'cr. by 184 7 he h<1d foundcd an
immigration company. Vcrguciw c Companhia. and with thc aid of a thrce ycar lo::m from
thc provincial govcrnmcnl. ccmtrilctcd a group of (,4 Gcrrn::m J.S. \Vitter. op.cit.:
W. Dcan. Clp.cit.. p.88.
4. J. Vcrgucirn. Memorial acerca cnlmri::ar:o c cullim dc cqf(:. C<1mpinas. 1874. p. 4. CL
S.G. KcP>t. Uhtr brasilianiKhr Zu\tci'lulc der Gcgnnmrt. mit Bc::.ug m{f die dcutsrlrc
A rwclr Rmsi/icn rmd der hrrniliani.qJrcn den ,\fange{ an
,\'J.Jarnr durrlr drut>chf Pmkrwicr :u crsct::cn. lkrlin.
5. J.P. Carvfllhn dc Rdarnrio aprnrntad(/ ao MiniHhio da .h:ricu!wra .... Rio uc
Janciro. pnn. p. ln vic" pf lhc lcrrm in which Siin Paulo <tj!riculturc was prc
"cnlcd tn thc lhcy prc,.umrnhly prcfcrn:d lhc cnnlr;rcl. orfering thcm a 50" ..
in ncl pmfil tn nnc thclll a picccralc pcr unil nf produccd.
fl. l.c Comtc von drr Strrucn PPmhor.. /.r brul,r,:rr r/11 Hn:sil. Paris. I H50.:. pp. I 02 I 04.
A vcry 'iirndar cnr1lrad wn' l1oclwccn Senator F.A. dc S(l\17:1 Qucirol and a group of
111 2. lhc only wcrr thal inthis casc intcrcst nn nutstanding dcht
t:h:uJ:rd only nftcr four yc:U\, thc contracl w:v.; for lii"C ycars. and Ihr planirr agrccd tn
Iei oul hmd ln lhc li!hourrr' 011 onc of pl:mt:llion.., PrJCr thr cnntract had hccn cnmplctrd.
1:. Violli da { 'mla. npxil .. pp. I 177. nlr rwmhcr of cnHcc a\si!!nrd tn cach
i1tntn1,.rnn1 fnmily !lq'!fndrd in prirKiplc on Ihr rnrmhcr. \O and :1gc of J. P.
Cr.rvt1lho dc 1'-:lof;rrr<., op.c11 .. p. i.
i. Smnr hnvc rn;untnincd thal undcr tht" lir"t nmtract a o.,iJ,:rllflcant llllmhcr
11
f
ln p::ty pff lhcir dcht., within lht lir\1 ycar\ and mo\c on lll cstahlro.,h
thcnl'.dvc' on 1hr1r llWII. J.l
1
. Cannlhn dc Mmat' op.rit .. p. 7: Aurwondcru
1
n:.\
190
Sharecropping and Sharecroppers
Zei.tung, Rudolstadt. 25 September 18.57. no. 39: J.J. \'On Tschudi. Viagem lis prot(ncias do
Rio de Janeiro ,e So Paulo. S.o Paulo. 1953. pp. 1'. 35. 149. The presidcnt of thc province.
Saraiva. reported in 1855 that of the initial 900 immigrants timt had settlcd on Vcrguciro"s
property in 1847. by 18:55 about 670 were left The rest had eithcr fulfilled lhcir contracls or
indemnified the planter for the costs incurred on their behalf. By 186 7. howc\"er. an cmissary
of the Prussian government H. Haupt noted that only under very favour.ablc eireumslamees
-such as ferti]l,e plots. a !arge family. the absence of diseases - could an immigr.ant family
succeed in its debt within1 a reasonabl!e time. H. Haupt. in Sodedadc Intcrnacional
de Relatorio. I. 1 86 7. p. 39.
8. JJ. von op.cit.. pp. 135. 166.
9'. Jbid, p. 05; J.P. Carvalho de Moraes. op. cit. pp. 55-56.
W. J.P. C:uva1ho de Moraes. op.dt ... p. 5; it was argued that this would allow to tcnd
a I arger number of coiTee U'ees. ibid .. p. 59.
I]. 'Relar;o das colcmias exjstentes na provincia de So Paulo no ano de 1855'. an anonymous
manus,cript dated 8 March 1856. located in lhe archin: of the Jnstituto Histrko e
Geogrtfico Brasilei1ro. Rio de Janeiro. lata 71/7. There wen; 117. i31 slavcs in thc provincc
in I 854. How many were engaged in coiTee cuhivation is not easy to say. but thcy surely
constituted a majority. J.F. Camargo. Crescimenlo da popular;iio rw estado de Sdo .Paulo c
seus aspeclos economicos. Siio Paulo. 1952. H. p. 12.
12. J.P. Carvalhode Momes. op.cit.. p. 10.
13. E. Vioui da Costa. 'Politica de lenas no Brasilenos Estados Unidos. in her D.a MIJnarquia
a Rep'ublica. op.cit. As she points out. the defenders of thc law. mostly largc landowncrs.
were essentiaJiy concerned with the efTects of this law in providing frcc labour to rcplacc
their slaves. Liberals opposed to the landowning intercsts rejcclcd il. arguing instcad for thc
donation of .land to immigrants as an inccntive to auracl forcign scttlcrs tn civilisc thc
country. Cf. J .. de Souza Martins .. A imigraro e a criH.' do Brasil a.r:rarin. So Paulo. 197 3.
pp. 51-54; W. Dean. 'Latifundia and Land Policy in Ninctccnth-Ccntury Brazil". Hispmlic
American Historical Review. U. no. 4.
141. Those wlilo wen: anached to tlhe planla.tions wen: a rclati,cly unimpvrtanl group of
agregados. a kind of retai1ner aHowed the use of margim'll eslatc land in rcturn for occasional
llabollr and other services. M.S. de Caurvalho franco. llnmrm lirre.s na orclon csamocrata ..
Sao Pillulo. 1969. Cf. Pcter Eisenberg. '0 homem esquecido: o trab:llh;ulor Iivre nacifmal no
seculo XIX. Sus;,estes pa ..ra uma. pesquisa. Anai.i do Pmrfitta. XXVIU. I!J77.
15. J.J. von Tschudi, op.cit.. p. I )6. Ts.chudi wa ..o; a.n cnvoy of thc Swis" scnl tl1
Bn11zil in 111'160 to inspe:'t c.he conditions of Swiss He wao; him5.df a landnwncr
in li11is nali1ve country and reported sympallleti:ca.l'ly thc pl:mtcr .. wen: wcll qtidkd with
the modi1fications nf the corrlract thc'le nrren;d lhcm a "'nlid flU:mmlce fnr thc capital
ilw.est.ed.
16. Allgemeine Rudolsladl. 2J Octnh<cr nn. lJ. pp. UI.Q.
The Swiss con,sul-general Dsvid W" e1u.:cpliomd i1n hi1'1 "]mp;:athctic atli!lnllc tm-nml" thc
i.mmigrantll. Us,ually th'r consuls n"eglectcd their inh:rc"t" or wnr"-C. One of hio;
was Charles Perret-Genti1ll, who wns an immigraHnn 11!" wdl 11!"- Scnatnr
brolher-inlaw and business parlner. Pcnel Gentil'" imrncdin,lc prcdnn'ior llad hccr1
di1smi:!ised aftcr ha1ving mi.u1ppmrrialed lhe Pr Ihr S4-hwri;cr Uilr .. Hrri:n in Rio dc
Janeiro. .R.A. Dir Ualllm!I( 1md l.rmtmrcd;r N.!'frt'l;nkrr irt chr
180.1-/.Slol. Ztiril;h. j()'fifl,, pp. 17 t 72.
17. T. Da,vat1 . np.cil .. conlains ll dcl.a.i1
1
cd Zlll:l.:ll'Unl nf thc s(;'C: ;'j,l-.u t'hr ol" tli.,.,;u
n:producinJ reporh by qeverrnl oh'I,C'P-'C:f'l in Umrdnhlolt.. X.
Jahq;tanp. u. no. )4 . 24 July a.nd xn. llllhf;fl""lil 111. no. td. 1H NPH:IIIh<cf IIHI.
immigrant!-i' di:!lconlent was ljitguavnu:d lhy thc hu;l thnl for Ii! llUJYlhcr thcu
JOVCrnmenls ha,d advanccd lfiMilJlOft I,;H'ih. fn;c nlf itrh:fC"':I lunl: fllf whidl thry
were heing hy Vcrjtueirn.
Stio Paulo Coffee Plantations
191
18. T. Davatz. op.cil.. pp. 105-l 06.
19. Deursche AUSI!'CUidererZeitung.. Bremen .. 22 October 1857. noo 83. quoting a report ofthe
Brazilian Imperial Colonisation Agency on the lbicaba revolr. J.Jo \on Tschudi. 'Bericht des
sclrnveizo ausserordentlichen Gesandten in Brasilien. Herrn \'0 Tschudi. an den Bundesrath
ber die dortigen Verhltnisse der Kolonisten. vom 60 Oktober 1860'. Sch1rei::.erisches
Bundesblatt. XII. Jahrgang HI. no. 61. 28 No\oember 1860. ln his comments to the Swiss
Federation. which Tschudi sent along with his report. he pointed out that in fact part of thc
bl,ame for the dilliculties belonged ro the immigration agcnts who had not selected the
Jabourcrs properly and had contracted many disabled peoplc simply to eam the commission.
He p:uticularly bl:amed the immigr.ants themsclves. ''oho did not always show the necessary
interest in their worli. Tschudi had omitted thesc aspects in his rcport to the Imperial go\-crn-
ment. 'in order to emphasisc thos'c points which arisc from the conditions in Brazir.
Schwei:erisches .Bzmdesblall. XlL Jahrgang Hf. no 61. 28 November 18600 p. 2690 T.
Davatz. op.cit.. p. 100: .IVI.Jo Valdetaro. colnias de So Paulo. in Brazil. Rclalorio da
Reparfir,o Geml das Terms Pribliras aprescntado em 31 de man;o dc 1858. Rio dc
Janeiro. 1858. p. 91.
20. AI/gemeine A tmranderwzgs-Zeitung. Rudolstadt. noo 43. 23 Octobcr 185 7. p. 189.
21. The theme is prominent. for example. in the previously citcd works by JOS. VVitter and So
Buarque de Holanda. as weil as in Wo Dcans Rio Claroo
22. RoAO Natsch. op.cil.. makes this point quite clcaro
23. Ao MarshalL Principles of Economics. London. various cditionso
241 SON.S. Chucng. Thc Thcory of Share Tcnancy. Chicago. 1969
25. T. Holloway. 'Thc coiTcc colorro of Sao Pauloo. Brazil: migration and mobility. 18801930'.
in K. Duncan and L Rutledge (eds). Land and Labour in tmi11 Amcrim. Cmnbrid'ge. 1977.
1t is unlikely !hat So Paulo planten; did not know a\-eragc cofTee yicldso Thcy had thc
Paraiba Vallcy c:'ll:pcriencc to go byo fn any casc. no cntreprcncur can cxactly prcdicr futurc
markets and
21Jo J.Do R.cid. Jro. 'Sharccropping and .Agricultural Unccrtaintyo. rnimco .. 1973: cf. JOD. Rcid.
Jr.o .. 'Sharccropping as an Undcrslandablc Markct Response: thc Post-Bcllum South'.
Journal of Ermwmic fli5tory. 19TI. which contaim <'i numbcr of con-
tract<; W tho<;c u<;cd in Siio Pauloo
27
0
Juan M:utinc7-/\licr. and in Southcrn Spaino Cuha. and Highland
Peru". Joumaf lhuam Swdin. I. no. 2. 19H.
2Ro
/\<; Jo..C Vcrgucirn. npociL p. 5 pointcd nul in 11'17J: 'I !llldcrslaml colcmisation can or1ly
pmgrco;<; if c;rrinl nul in f:tmilic<>o Onc I hat cacll family is cnmposcd or an :1\'Cragc
of fJ1vc mcnlrncr".'
J.Po Carvnlho dc npociL nppcndix 5. p.2.
JO. 1\0 Rarnm. 0 ''" IIrenil ,. 1111 Rio dc Janciruo 1112.:-. po 35!-!o
31. Thc t:lrnl.,e rontainnl lfl lhc c:uly corrlrru.:l' lhal half <lf any fnod cwp surplus hclon!!-cd to
thc planlcr. ,...,hich w;:,t. irrtcndcd ln frnm food in nfthcir
h11"1r arul in dclrum:nt lo wnrk in cniTcc cullivatiPil. w:t., ahandoncd as largdy
im::fTc,li\'C", Jof
1
. CZJrvallw 1k Mnrano npocil .. p.
Uo ( '0 Hru,..,cr. Oiio .'irJn,l'i;ca m(Fdnl A"nfrmitn in Sr. l'ouln in 1/rmilicno Ziirich. I X5 7. ppo 2S
r1. PfU.:iL, Po 711. t"Pildcrcd lhc f:tcl !hat the plantcr" handlcd rhc
of thc Unp a J,trnn: l.li\:llh.nni;J:c. in nf !lll' 'nmhit:llll dedttction-." made ln the
pJnnl.cr'>, hc W;!, .. C:l111\'l:fli.:Cd lhill lhC 'J:rthllllrl'f\ Willlid hc h{:ter nno jf tl!cy lt:Ceivcd lhtir
ltt ;rmd "nld 11 tlu:rmt:IH\, imtcad of thc plallln 0 0 0 :1., rheir intcrmcdian ..
0
lhc hii}'Cf'i thc pnxlucl and <.aH thclll any further ClllJc:l\'lliHo ()f ((l.llf.,Co
iiL:ouhlthw Ihn! Ihr lnhnurcr\ loOillJ)(:h \\llh lhc plantn.'
192
Sharec.ropp.ing and Sharec.ropper:s
The actualt.ime taken by immigJrants to amortise tlleir debts is a controversial issue. Some
aul.hors h.ave estimated thal it took an average of nine years. See E. Vioui da Costa.
coi.Onias de parceria". P' 114. W. Dean,. Rio Claro. pp. 105-07. on the contrar)'. maintains
that an avera.ge family cou.ld repay its debt withi1n fiv.e years or less. and in addition
accumulate some s.avings. Dean estimates H1at an aYerage family of lh'c members \IIOUid
t.end about 3,'000' coffee trees. yet most accounts indicate that this is an overestimate. See
note 3 7 below.
33. There "iS' evidence of olher work stoppages. Tsdmdi. t"iagem as prol'lifcias .... pp. 164-5.
n:pcds such a case for the plantation B;oa Vista in Amparo in 1858. The labourers were
a.pparently h.arvestilng green berr:ies along \11d1th tlle ripe ones to speed up the work.
Repri1manded by the planter ... wllo threatened p.ay deductions. they stopped tlu: harvest.
Another case is that of Portuguese immignmts on a. plamla.tion i1n the area of Rio Claro.
reponed inS. Maclhado Nunes. 'Colnias, na pliovincia deS. Paullo". in liazil. Ministeno do
lmperio, .Relatorlo ..... 1860. p. 15. MJ. Val'detaro. op.cit.. p. 94. reports thal on tlle pllanta-
tions B;ery and Cauvatinga mosl. Swiss :md Gerrrum labourers werre lazy and careless in the
fu:lfiJIIment of tbeir duti,es, to the poinl of aba.ndoning work entirely. Cf. H. Haupt. op.cit. p.
3>9: 'The laboure:r in sharecropping (''obreiro colono por parceria .. ) will moreon:r be a very
bad worker, because he necessarily loses the Iove o1r work which him no result. nor
independence. ln this case .. he wilil seelot to avoid his duties and deceive the planter. Soon a
fiee.lling of enmity will grow up betwee:n them. and in many cases deplorable scenes "i:ll
result.'
34. S. Machado Nun,es. op .. cit.. pp. 2-3. Cr. also J.P. Carvalho de Moraes. op.ci,t.. p. 86.
Tschudi, Viag.em tis pmvindas .... p. 183. 1111. 69. reported tha.t on Hu: pl;antaon Sao
Lourenr,;o some families tended no more than 500 to 700 cofTee trees. Whcn asked why. C.hl:'y
replj,,ed tha.t they we.re overburdened by their debts and' Hn.1s not interested in culti\ating
cofTe,e. n,,ej;r food plots produced sufficient for them to l'i'Oe on. and the) saw no reason to
kii',J themselves working.
35;_ MJ. Valdetaro. op.cit .. p.91
36. Jbid,.; JJ. von Tschudi. St:hweizerisc11es Btmdesblau. XU .. Jahrgang IH. no. 61. 28
November 1860.
37. Quan1lit.ativ,e d11ta on the number of cofTe,e trees tended oy immigrants. eilher on a.n
individual Oll' fam,i.lly basis. are scan:e. to Cmrvalllo dc Moracs. op.rit.. pp.
it was initiaJiy expccted thal a laboun::r could tend up to J.IJ(M) cofTce llrces in lhc casc of
mature groves betw,een five liUnd twelve years of age .. pro"ided he wceded them four lo fhe
ti1m,es a year IIIId hsd n;o additional ohligalion,s. ln thi"! cas.e. addilionallabour fnr lhe
would be lf ehe labourer. however. s.imullaneQU"'Iy g.rc"" cwp!i . he
cot.dd not tend mon: thatn I JJOO l.o 1 .. 200. ln lll;tual fact a tcnd,cd ooly l'lclwccn 1:'1()0
and LO()C) trees. while women Iook on hdween .500 and tJOO lrce" nf Ihre ln twche year"' of
age. s]nce 'in gene:ra.J ll1bot11rers du not pay thelir y,i,th anylhing ch.c l"lut lhcir
from coilfie,e 111d for this reas.on they willl ;tr)' ln lcnd "" 'lm!IIH ,,.,f lrcc'l ttu:),'
possibly can. in order to hnve more li,mt: fpr their o\ilrn nnd tn hcnc,fll fwm' tllhell'
activities. lt is Chis difficuhy wid1 whkh lhe plnnler:v;. .... T11i" I'; nnc Pr lhc ruwn'ii
wh1y in llfl,js province tbe work of 1 fre'e hmbot1rer i11 coJuidcred em(icn,t lhilll! ,,r a
shilve.' lbid.. p. 86. Ocher 1t.ca.ttcr,ed evidencc 'UfJJ'Pfl'l 1l:ur \ie" chal lhc
productivity in' coffee j,nde,ed l!ow .. E. VioUi da, 'Cnl,1'lnia" .. pp .
. 1173-4. Tschudli. ViOHtm civ .... pr. 4.fdO. I N.;l.
J.P'. CarvaJiho de Moraes. op.cit .. 'Mlpa dc Sno Jcronim(l,, P't.lhlli"'h('d' nn pbntn,liun
run under l.he nll lhc thrnl nn thc
betwccn 1852 illll'lld I Sfl9. :'litc. r ntiNll"l(;t pf "Vr k t"f'i nnd l:lllil'i.!Ufl,['f'll),
il!llcOrnt in lhac perirnt a.nd d!ale nr liU11d' dcrfll.ltc. Of !he lnl!\1 111 r ... .. ;U)<l!;,
pa.id mhcir dtbls and madc 1 pro,Ar hy 1: J'!r" hnd m,trcl) rcruud lhcir ll('hr ... ..:Pil
lifiii .. C:d i,nde::bted. On lhe ut d'nlill j,l i'l J'l41'11\iltli,C' Co if Uul lhc ur
IFC:C!II Umdtd per la,bourer, 1111 Jcll.'t lhe Jllh<JUII'Ct"l' II:JI,Miii'li"' f!E:f 11'110fl'lh rur llln"'c [11JIIiil.(;"l Whti
hia,d repai1d lhei:r Thc nf nuC,q,l:rllndinjl tk:I:JC !il IWt rtlt IIIP'IC who
So Paulo Coffe,e Plantarions
193
indebted at the time. We can also calculate the consurnerh,orker ratio in order to determine
the comparative productive capacity of tihe families. Since t.he greater the number of
labourers in a family in proportion to the consumers. thc greater would bc its productive
cap.acy. this should be refllected in the monnhly earnings of its workers. provided that thev
worked at full capacity.
C/W ratio
Mil. rcis
Number of
families
MONTHL Y EARNINGS PER 'WORKER FROM COFFEE CUL TIVATJON
BY RATIO OFTHE FAfl.HLY:
PLANTATIONSOJERNIM0.18S21869
l.0-1.4
6.508
25
1.5-1.9
7.714
20
2.0 and over
8.111
16
,(We excluded three farnilies from the total 64 v..ith fa\.ourable results: one was a widow who
married arnother immigrant and joined her accounts to his: the other two werc single individuals.)
The earnings gi,en refer to income from coiTee cultivation. since il was with this that debts
were paid. Harvests ,.ar:ied from year lo but il may be assumed that O\'er the years earning.s
roughly expressed the number of trees tended. As the table indicates. producti,e capacity of thc
ramilies is imersely related to the number of trees tended by each of its workers as expressed in
monthly earnings. This is a further indicaon that immigrants did not respond to lhe econornic
incentives contained in the sharecropping contract. As point.cd out. thcse fig.ures refcr to thosc
fami]i,es who at some point managed to pay their dcbts and those who in addition could save.
Thus. they do not tell us anything about lhe behaviour of thosc who wcrc still indebled. although
it may bc prresumed that C\"Cn the families had been indcb!ed for a considerablc period
of their permanem::e ..
38. A lfgemeirre A rmmndcrrmgs-Zciturrg. R udolstadt. 2 Octoher 185 7. no. 40.
39'. J.P. CarYalho d'e Moraes. op,.cil .. p. 21.
40. rbid .. p. 21. The inilial deht incurred by thc immigrants has somctimcs bccn takcn as an
indicati(m uf thc e:-;i,.,cncc of dcbi peonagc. Cf. w. Dcan. Rio Cfaro .. pp. 97-8. and E. Viotti
da Costa. 'Colonias dc parccria'. p. lt19. lfwc ddinc debt peonagc in its stricl sense as being
lhe inh::nHonal burdcning of wilh a dchl lo tic lhcrn to a property. lhis intcrprcla-
tion inapprnpti!llc fnr thc Gl'iC of Sii,o Pmllo. Thc primary airn planlcrs pursucd in
charging wilh lhcir tramfJ(lrt and fnod ;l(hanccs was to rcco\'Cr thcir initial
ifn"C'IImcnl. Slmhilily nf hthour on lhc plantation a wdcomc hy-prnduct. Signific:mtl.y. an
cnntracl o;.tatcd holh lcnglh nf cnnlract and :unnunt nf dicht. in E. Violli da Costa.
'(olnilil" dc parccri;t', p. 177. rcrortcd. il was not infrcqucnl
tlurr immiJtr.:mh mnHd frnm nnc plmntation tn atwthcr .. l;tking thcir dcbt wilh thcrn. C.
HcU'I'>Ct, opxit. p.l. ln :uldinn. thc Vcr,1wcirn includcd a allowing fnr
uamicr nf immiJ:Umh. Plnnlcr". il lruc. w<:rc accus.cd :rt limco;; nf trcating immigrants likc
whilc .. m H. Jhmp'l. or'.dl .. r. Flm\cvcr .. Tschudi whn was quitc critical nf thc
S5o Pnulo w:H prohnhly whcn hc nolcd: 'I h:wc nol ohscr\'cd such a
Oll nnr or thc rl:mt.alinm I >itcd: all planiCf'- dcJ.:Iarcd !hat thcir grcatcst intcrcst
W11111. 11t1 lhcir frcc of dchl' ..,urdy nnl k<t'l hcc.;na ....<.: this wmdd havc mcant
lhrll lnhnt1rcr .. "'nrkcd 111 l"iuo:,m 1i1 prrnin!'iw .... p. 1 SfJ.
i I. nm:rm ri' prm-indcH ..... p. J.,tJ.
J.P. ('tllfntltw,Jc op . ..:-11 . pp. !tJ
0. lhid .. rr- :n.
>l,t lhid., r I) nnd llJllle"nth\ r!'f a.fl I l:!hnur Clllllr:KI: d. :\.1.J. \'allklarn. op.cit..
1Md S.

ror nf (Pfllr;nt
194
Shar;ecropping an Sharecroppers
415. P'. Denis, Brazil. London,. 19 E I. P'P 2 16-17 ..
46. J.P'. Carvalbo de Moraes. op.cit.. pp. 20-2 1.
47. Ord. Libro 4, Titl45. of tbe Ordenaroes e Leis .do lmp.erio de Portugal. various editions.
48. Lei de locatyio de seni!JOS of 11 October 1837. in Colepio de Leis do lmperio do Brasil.
UB7, VIU.
49. Machado Nunes, op.cit., p.IO. repcrts the case of one German and two Swiss labourer:s of
the Laranjall phmtation in the area of Campinas. anested in Sao Paulo and condemned in
accorda111,ce with the 1837 law to pa.y double thcir debt for having refused to fulfil their
sharecropping contracts. However, he not'e5 that in another case a similar sentence was
ovemded with the argum.ent that the .1837 did not ap'P'lY to sharecropping. He con-
clluded that 'with such a deci.si.on the pla.nter will have to lose all his adva.nces to the
labounm;" since persecuting tllem in civil courtwill have to prodluce this resull.' Consequent-
ly, 'if immigtation according t.o the sharecropping. system is to increasc in So Paulo ... it
will lbe itndispensabJI,e to pass specia] legislation regulat.in.g the stmrecropping contract and
fumishing an easy rneats to resolve quickly the conllicts bet.ween labourers and planters."
Jbid., p. 20. Cf. Tschudi,. Schweizerisches Bundesbfau. XU. Jahrgang IH. no. 61.. 28
November 1860,. Jl' 2150. for atOllhlei case. Tsctn.1di w<JJs highly cdtical of the practice of
11pplying the 1837 law to sharecropping contra.cts. suggesting that this opinion is shared by
a number of Sio Pau]o jurisls. Tscl!ludi. 'Denkschrift an Seine Exzellenz den Senator J.oao
Vi,einll Cansansao de Sinimbu. Minister deJF Auswrtigen Angelegenheiten. ibid .. p. 297.
Finany, tlile police chief. Tavares Bas:tos. who was ordel'ed to in\esligate the e\ents on the
Ibkaba planlation in 1857. suggesled a number of lega.lreforms. in particular that the I 837
law be ad.apt'ed to the sharecropping corntract. 'Relatori'o de Tavares Bastos sobrc
coloni1Ufiio em. S. Paulo'. in T. Davatz. op.cit.. pp. 231-40.
50. As Jose Verg1..1cim. op.dL. p . .5. noled 'However. this s<JJme contnu:l. as positive as it is. does
not sati.sfy the rolono, wllo det.ests bcing subjected to it: and si,nce he does his daily job
under conslraint. he tries e!1!dusi1vely to make use of tlhe plot of land I whi,ch he is assigned I
becamse he has no llmpe of OWllli,ng il soT1rlleday: Tsclludi' a further reason for lhe
immig.rants' unresponsive1111ess to the m:w contn:u;:t With risi,ng coiTee prices in 18h0. it was
in l.he planters' inten:st to pay a piecerate rather than shmrc of growing nct rrofi,ts. For the
llabourers it was the reverse; at a time of ri1si11g prices .. woulld han: bcndilcd more
from a sh.aJecroppi1flll than fmm a p1et,eTIIe conln:tiCI. T'>dluJdi. Via,f;'f'm pmrinda5 .... P'
157. Jt m'ust lbe kept in mind ChJat tli1'''= piecerate eslahli,.hed . ..,.lnJil',e lhc shmrc i111
ne:t pro161t was defin,ed by contract and could no' bt! altered long thc contrm:t rcma1ilf11ed
in force. us.ua.llly until tlile deb; had been repaid.
51. TscllnJJdi, Vigtm iu p.rrmnrias. pp. 176. I 8J. Both llong-tcrm prnducCi\ity :-.mllrl1!.!1h of lifc
of coffee trees depend imJI)OI'ta.ntly on lhe n.!J1mber and qualily tl<f 111"' wrcding". 1\t lht" tintc.
ttJe a.vera.ge 1111.1mber of w'eedings WIJS. fivc to s.i:tt a year, j,ncludil1(! lht' hliliJ\'t"'l
a11dl tsptlrramariio do cbc:o a.fl.er il. hy lhc I "tipul:111cd thc
number of weedin,gs. Chese could be donc wilh greRICcf nr lc."!Ger carc. H 'll.crt"
eliminated by only ligtuly Uu: I!Jound. Hu: "loil w(lUid h:nd tn h::mlcn anti htTilll11C
impermea,bh: to the rain. beside nol llldcqurlllc vcolih.tinn" Sriln P1u1ln. dn
Jnqu.t!rUo agrr'cola Jnbr1 n ,fJWdn lmoum nt/iTim m1 d, .\. Ptwln,
Sio P'aulo. 1904. pp. Sll-7.
52. J.P. Carvalho de Morllles. op.ciL p. 100. notc' !hnl 111 !11U1th!rr nr plru1h:-r"
i.r'litroduc,cd ilmmignmt la,bour in the IM.f ...O:J. Sec ih,i:d .. rr. 77 rnr 111 'IC'lUiphPII nf llu: diiTc
types. olf contlrilct U:id on the pla.nla,linn" nan, ilh frrc hmhnur in I l'lh'l. Tht: 1\Crlllr lfllf
I''IYmiClt of tU1hiv111tion 1u11d haf\!t\1 mi,&thlt hi11VC h:en mlfm,ll) ln l:llUfUrr
labourers nboul l;ow prnfh fmm )'PUllt: ..::nrrcc Jlfll\ hcn h:-mlc,ll un.drr lhr
!d11.n:croppin111 arnmiiJCmcnt JmJJ.quim Annifiu.:in lln Llc
do uabailho Iivre c:m in J,;,t,irin.i 1111 rrwnioi)JO .lt
Campinas .. l'ho de Jane:iro. 1952.
So P'aulo Coffee Plantations 195
53. Domingos Jaguaribe Fillho. A lgrmras pafa,ras sobre a emigrariio. So Paulo. 1877. pp. 34-
5.
54. P. Denis. op.cit.. p. 202.
55. See A. Ramos. op.cit. p. 104. on the labour-demand irnbalance between cul!ti'"ation and
harvest. and its consequences.
56. For two contrasting positions on immigration systems .. see the cxtended debate between
Joaqui.m Bonifcio do Amara! :md Jose Vergueiro. published in the Ga::eta de Campi1ws
between Ja.nuary and July of 1870. Vergueiro was totally disillusioned with pri,ately spon-
sored immigration. In addition to the Ibicaba re\olt. in the 1860s the Swiss Federation had
sued Vergueiro and Co. for the reslitution ofpassage money adYanced by the cantons to the
immigrants and e\"entually the company dedared bankruptcy. R.A. Natsch. op.cit.. pp. 207-
208. In the early 1870s. the Angelica plantation. also belanging to Vergueiro. was sold
ofT to creditors. the London and Brazilian Bank. The Engl.ish managers. however. do not
seem to ha1.e met with much mon: success. They are alleged to ha,e been 'drunken incompe-
tents' who br:utalised the labomers and led tlle estate once again into bankruptcy. lt is
report,ed that in 1876. Angelicas administrator was murdiered by some of his labourers.
G.B. Marchesini. II Brasile e le sue colonie agricole. Rome .. 1877. Joaquim Bonifacio do
Amaral. in contrast. tra\elled to Europe hirnself in 1870 to rccruil Jabour personally. Even
he. however. comph1ined of the scant support he had recein:d from other planters in this
undertaking. Ga::l'ta de Cmnpinas. 24 July 1870. Cf. also J.B. do Amara!. op.cil.
57. P. de Turenne. 'l.'imrnigration et Ia colonisation au Bresir. Rente Britmmiqur. February
1879. p. 453. J.B. do Amara!. op.cit.
58. A Laliere. Le cafi dans /"Etat de Saifll Paul. Brisil. Paris. 1909 .. appcndix.
59'. The law included the important pro\iso thal unlil such children benune 21 years old thcy
could be used by their mother's owner. Thoug.h tcdmically frce. the inghruos condition was
almost indistinguishabJ,.c in praclice from that of a slavc. TllUs. thc Rio Branco law wouJd
have Iinie practical signi.ficance until 1892. whcn the fi1rst of those born under it would
be:come 2 I.
60 The mosl. lhorough s!Udy is in Rob<crl W. Slcncs. 'The Demography and Economics of
Brazilian Ph.D. disscrlaon. Stanford Uni,crsity. 1975. pp. 120-78.
61. Sincc the mulc lcams whic-h tlw railroads rcplaccd hat! somclimcs rcquircd much as 20""
of thc pla1nlation lahour forcc to opcratc. lhc numocr of madc avnilablc for licld work
wa.'l quile E.Viotti da Da sm:alo a rol!mia. Silo Paulo. 1966. pp. 154 77.
112. The prc!iidcnt of S:iio PaulP nolcd in l18i I thal thc pl:mtcrs wcrc nn long.cr 'stubhornly
to traditi(m and routinc ar; had prcviously donc. hul wen; rww cmploying
vari.ouo; fpreign and dnmcG.tic 'o rcplacc 'thcir scarcc and expensive lahour. Siio
Rl?lalnrin .apn'JEWtodo .... prln dn prrm"rrcia ... 5 dc frnrcim dc 7 I. p.
",:z. er. 1\. dc QucilrP7 Tdc .... 'tl!l cullurc du Cl!lfcicr :"1 Silo Paulo. Rrcsir. /. 'J:"cmtrmtislc
frmu;ah. VI. nn. dQ, 7 I pp. 71 a dctailcd dcscription of lhc produc-
tion J'lfOCII:'I'\ time.
fiJ. J. Vcr.guciro. op.cil.. p.
f!,.:l, o .ntwJo .rfa lumllrcl, Rio dc J:wciro. 1!-!IJ .. p. I lhc 11'utch lr;ncllcr
V1n Deliden l,l!l.,rrnc cornrncnlcd in 11-110 thal durinr>r thc prcccdinJ.: lcn yc;us thc plantcrs had
nhi"C ln 'i1J!I1Iifknnlly lhc procJucti,ity nf lhcir whn wcrc now 'hctlrr
heller red 'arctl ftlt', hut w.IHl h:IHkr'. c. \";ul Dddcrl l.iicrne.
Hm:.il mrd Jom: Rt'mt rm Cul111n. Londo11. I !-1!\5. p. II I.
65. Jn uon C'arva.lho die luul a .. an aftcr!houl>!lll lhal lhc llllllerial (iovcrn
mcnl :111: lcn"l 1hc ;1hullrr' \\.11(1 lahom a of to -10$000
(m em.:h d1ild Lilll!.lcr Ihr nr,r o.f 11 yc:H\ whu 1.7ornc., in thc nf lll\ parmh. op.cit..

196
Sharecropping and Sharecroppers
66. 0 Lavrador. G.azeta de Campinas. 20 Febrruary 1870.
67. Congresso Agfi,cola. Coleriio de documentos. Rio Janeiro. 1878. pp. 47-8. Onlhc Congrcss.
see Pet,er L. Eisenberg. 'A mentalidade dos fazendeiros no Congresso Agricola dc in
J.R. Amarall .. apa (ed). Modos de produpio e realidade brasileira. Petrpolis. 1980.
68. De,creto no. 2827. 15, Matrclll 1879 .. in Colet;iio de Leis do lmperio do Brasil. 1879.
69. The strike broke oul on June 9th. The Tribuna Liberal of September I, I and I 3. I 878.
carried detaikd reports on the strike by tbe Police Chief sent to investigate the cn!nts. as
weil as infmmation from a speciaJ investigating commissi,on.
70. They drew up a Iist of nine demands: that the planter fulfil his promise to provi,dc ncw
hollllses within six months; that foodstufTs be charged at ClJrrent priccs: that they receive thc
total amount of flour fmm the maize ground at the planter's mill; that thcy not be forced to
abandon their food plots for new unculti:'ll'ated land: tha.t they be paid for thc repl.anting of
trees: llhat medical expenses be shared by the plaunter: that doths for the harvest be provided
free of charge: and that a school and a teacher be pwvided free. Tribuna Ubeml. II Sep-
tember 1878.
7 L J.B. do AmaraJ. op.cit: Tribuna Libero!. II and 13 September 1878. The pre,ious ycar a
group of German labourers which Amaral had recruited in Lhe neighbouring. provinc,e of
Santa Calarina had gone on strike and somc ofthe l!eaders had been senlenced to jail.
72. J.B. do Amaurall. op.cilt.. pp. 2418. 252.
73. C.F. V an Deiden Leme. pp. 213. 2 I 7. The question is also discussed C!\tensivcly in Con-
gresso Agrlcola. op.cit
741 Brazil. Anais da Ccimara. 1884. V. pp. 541-J.In 18841. his brolhcl". Martinho Prado. defend-
ing a bill introduced in the So Paulo assembly to subsidise the cnrirc costs of the passage of
lmmigrants. sta.ted cl,early the purpose of such a measure: I') to replacc thc sl;wes with free
llabmurers and prepare for immedia.te emancipation.; 2) to allow immigrants to arrive fn:c of
3) to permit planters to employ free labour without h::t\ing to advance rnoncy. Sao
Paulo. A nais da assembleia. 18841. pp. 34. 224.
75. Anais da Camara. J8.84 . V. p. 54.0.
76. Anais da Camara. 1888. IV. p. 323.
77. Anais do Stm.a.do, 1887. annex lo m. p. 6: another wurcc cstimaled lhat betwcen 1882 <tml
1888 Dl total of 103 . .571 had entered llle pro,incc thrnugh ch;mnd<o. Dr.
Francisco de Paula Lazaro . . Relatr}rio aprn('fl((lr/n a A Hodarfi(J Pmmntnra (/('
lmig.rcu;ifo,em Mlnas. Juiz de Fora. 1888. p. 85.
78. C.F. Van Deiden Lerne. op.cit.. p. 354.
79'. A. Castro. 7 eruaios Johrr a ecmromia lmnilf'im. Rio dc Ji:lncirn. 1971. II. p. iH_
80. Decreto no. 2113. 22 December I .. in ein (imem11
81. De,crelo Federal no. I llf)2. 12 Dcccmlhcr I RQO, 'On-. crimr.-. n lil'l(:nl;uk dn
in ibid.
82. F. Mosconi. 'Lc cla:o;si so<;i,a,li nd 8r11._i,lc c le lnw furuinni'. l.o Ri/ilfnlil Sodu/1". VII.

F. Dafe:rt A falta, dc crn Si'w Pn.ulo'. in ln.-.ltiUIP '\r.rmH''''i"'P,
Relatnrio, IR92. p. 20f1; F.P. Liu:aw np.cll... pp. 10 I! I. m>lcd !hal frcnln1t"ti
d,emanded high nnd wert wi,ddy :wd urm:lmahlc: L. ( 'outy.
f:tmle dr biolo,f(it lc nlji; .. Rio ,d!,c hnciro. pp. 12n :-<.
R). M. Hall. 'Thc Origim. of Ma"" lmmiJ(nltinn in Hr;uil. IH71 pn.t. l'h.O.
Columhi1a1 19tl9. pp. 144 7.
84. The lhemc is a, onc. ror CUI11'111ph;, lhc phm,lrn H1 !1'1(' frtl/l#t:filll :h;tlt"IIIO.
op.cit
So Paulo Coffee Plantations
197
85. Coffee has been an itinerant culture in Brazil. Simuhaneously tlhere existed a frontier rel>!.ion
where coflee was just penetrating. a region where the groves were fully productive. a
declining region suiTering from soil exhaustion. See. for example. A. Castro. op.cit.. p. 61.
\\
1
hereas until Abolition new land was cleared and new cofTee planted mostlv bv sla\.es or
fr,ee empreiteiros. from the 1890s om\ard immigr::ml labourers were also for forming
new plantations. This \\as done under a four-year contract which entitled the labourers to
grow food crops at will in the coflee rows. At the end of the contract. they were paid a
certain sum per tree. and the contract v:as replaced by the usual mixed task and piecerate
system. On new plantalions. the \irgin soil much more abundant food crops. In
addition. with intercalary growing. the labourers cultivated their crops while weeding the
cofTee trees. and food crops thus req1uired little extra labour. Food growing. on separate
plots. however. as generally practised on the older plantations. implied doubling. labour input
witlhout increase in profit for the workcr. Consequently. labourers preferred ncw plantations
and. if these were not availi:1ble. they still preferred thosc plantalions which allowcd
iruerc.alary crops rather than assigning separate plots. J.P. Canalho de Moraes. op.cit .. pp.
68-9: P. Denis. op.ciL. p. 213: A. Ramos. op.ciL pp.210-12: G. Maistrello. 'Fazendas de
cafe - costumes ISo Paulo)'. in A. Ramos. op.ciL pp. 556 7. 5 i2-3: /rrquerito Agricola.
op.cit.. p. 4.3: J. Brandao Sobrinho. Apreciaro da situar;o agricola ... do .P disrrito
agronmico do estado deS. Paulo . ... Sao Paulo. 1903.
86. C.F. de Lacerda. A crise do ca_fe: estudo das causas da crise do ca_fe e dos meios de
combate-/a. Sao Paulo. 190J. p. 15.
87. C.F. de Lacerda. Estudo da meiar;o. parceria. etc. e das sucn mfllagens. So Paulo. 1905.
p. 15. Only in the declining arcas did planters return to sharccropping. granting the
labourers. however.. a larger share. F.P. Lzaro Gom;:ahes. op.cit.. p . .:l2. dcscribcs the situa-
tion in the 18BOs.
88. lnqm!riltJ Agr.icfJfa .. op.cit .. p. 46: S. Colctti. 'Lo stato di S. Paulo c l"emigrazione it.aliana.
Bolletlino defi'Emigra::ifJfiC. no. 14 .. 19'08. p. d I. slales that. a.round Campinas planters were
unable to increao;e salaries:. so thcy had to compete with othcr regions by allowing cofonos to
culvate beans and mai1e in tl1e coffcc rows. He also notes that lhis was morc advantagcous
10 thc colmws than 70-100 mil-reio; morc pcr 1.000 coffcc trccs tcndcd.
Whilc il was bclicved thal thc!ioc intcrcalary crops had an advcrse ciTcct on thc
co1rfe,c yields of trecr;; ovcr four ycars old. in praclicc plantcrs dccisions in thi,s rcspccl
dependcd much more on fluctuation5 of coiTcc priccs and labour supply ttwn on tcchnical
condiliom. Sec !\. Ramo'i. op.ciL. p. I Oll.
89. F.P. Gom;ahc'>. op.cit. pp. 2'0, 28. For a typical colorwto contracl. sec thc Hollct-
/iniJ UJ./Icialr ddfu Cumtra /t(J/i(mo di CPmmrrcio ed Arti. Sao Paulo. II. no. 4.
190).
90. L. Couty. op.cit.. pp. I f>,fl. 7. wmmcnl" Pn tltc plantcr: 111 producing maize. ricc.
heanll, rnnd to rai'iilll(l animal'i in il imponing a lar":c parl of ils foodslufTs rrom
er. .Rnlhuirm COiriak dc,lla Cmncra llafiono di Cmrmll'r<io cd A rti. X V. July
19'17. p. Hl.
91. Sio Pll!ulr\ Rrlottirin flprn.rmmln ... da pmrl11cio ... 17 dc janciro /88 i.
pp. 120-22.
92. P. rJcni ... np.c11 ... p. 202.
!)J. llonarddli. /.n lli ,\. i'lWIII dd /lrwi/1 r t'rmixm::imrt iloliww. Turin. I!)!(,, pp.
71 rr.
94. Ut"f"lili nulcd. wcrc oflcn morr intLn .. tcd in 1l1c 111 thcir
rt:liiling 111 rrl;ll<;.J thzlll in dch;rrnminJl Wilj,:C'>, 111 lhc poillt of
loy;er 'l!l"llf.C\ hnl r1i<1ft' fn\nutnhlll." nw,hl ... to hi.J!hcr Op.ci!.. pp.
95. Ci. 1\.hi,lrrUn, PJl.t:rl., p.
198 Sharecropp.ing and Sharecroprpers
9'6. J.B. do op.ciL p. 244: F.P. Lzaro 'Gon<;alves. op.cit. .. p. 28: G. Maislrelllo. op.cit..
p. 55'9. Planters clearl;y regarded labourers contracted in famil!y units as cheaper. Thus
Maistrello, op.cit . p . .562. noted in I '9'22 that 'the tending of the coiTee groves is prefera.bl!y
dlone by famill1ies of colonos with ammal contracts. but unfortunaldy thcy are not always
sufficient and allmost all the p1anters must resort to extra personllel. NeedJ,ess to say.
such llabourers kamaradas I in weeding or harvesli:ng increases quile noticeably
the costs of the fazenda.' Pla:nters usually employed single men as arulsos - labourers
re,cruited exdusivdy for the harvest or specia.l tasks such as pruning - or as camarados for
coflee processing and transporting. They were paid on a monthly \vage basis. as young
fammes were. Large families were hired as rolonos. Carvalho de Moraes. op.cil .. p.
M; B'ollettino Ufficiale deJJa Camera ltaliana di Commercio ed Ar.ti. February 1903. p. 7 J:
cf. D. J.aguaribe Fillho, op.cit., P'P 19,. 32.
P. Denis, op.dt,. pp.216,. 318-23. noted that in comparison with Bmzilian J:abour. halian
immigral'llS were 1110t only more hardworking btU also made their women work. Rather tllnm
a cultund trait,. t.lhis is surely one further aspect of tlle different labour arrangemems under
which they wer'e contracted. Immigrants bc!ing hi1red' in farnihr units. they were expected to
make alll able family members work. while Brazilians were usually employed as singJ"e wage
labourers.
97. MaistreUo, op.cit., pp. 558-9. cakulated in I '922 the incomes of three immi1grant familiies
witlil different consumer/worker ratios. and showed that at the prevailing wage J,en:ls a
family of four with only ome worker was practically im:apable of making ends meet. At the
end ofthe year, the )arge fa.mily would have deared I.IJOS,()OO. the family with 2 workers
620$000,. and the small familly only 140SOJO.
No. of c/w trees per annual harvest cxlll'a am11.1al
size workers ratio family l.l:eeding eamings .,.,ork cxpenses
w 6 1.66 16.000 2.4005 480$ fiOO$ 2.J50$.
$ 2 2.S 7.000 1.050$ 2405 460$ l.IJQS.
4 I 4.0 3.000 450$ 70$ 120$ 780$
With weeding wages calculla.tedl on the basis of families. il is dear that familics with a smalll
number of workers. elterting themselves proportionately morc. wouJ,d do
worse. Earnin&s from e;11tras derive from day wages recehred fo'r l<t'iks nol in the
corlltract.
98. The' wodd price Co in the mid-1890s. parcly hecau<u: or im:rcaS(.'d supply. bul
pla.n1ters on planti,ng new trees. prote-.:ted by the falling c111change ralc whicll kcpl pric,rs
in domestic currency high. By 1896. ev,en ehe pricc in mil-rei'll h<:gan ln drclinc "h:uply..
Howew:r. coffee supply (;;OJrUinued dimb as new buo;.heo;. pllmlcd undcr thc slimulus ofchc
high pri(.:eS whi1'Ch ltu111d pr,evail,ed four or f11ve ycars cnrlier. heg:u11 ltl cflmr into piiTI<hn:on.
The amoiiJnt or coffee grown i11 lhe 11900-1905 perif,d wa ... douhlc tha111f 11'1
1
)0 ancJI pricc:oo.
CCJ'ntinued at a relllltively llow levell. with some impron:mcnl nJier

M. Hall. (lp.ci'l.. p.
1153.
'9'9. Such as compan'y stores. confl,:oo.calion' of pnl(hu.:c. fr:mdul1en1 me;J,'IIJrc". "lthhPhllnll
wSJges" and much Perha.p5 ehe mnsl fnmou'l rep:1r1 rm Mich malh;r'l. and nnr 'llihich
helped pwvoh lhe 1902 hali1a.n1 ban nn cmi:tzr!lltiPn 111 Sau P';u.!ln. 1\. Mll""i.
'Cond!i.zioni dei colon1i1 i1Cnlii11ni nelllo !iUUn di San Pnuln' . llnlltllit!tJ cldl' fmiJ:rfl:intlf. nt. i.
1902:. part. of tfnl,e report de1llinl!l w:ith comp,Jn1i1111111 from immil'!rnnh in IP.S. P1nhcirP nml M.
Hall (eds) . .A cla!Hf opf'raria no llra.tU. cJonmr4'"'11tn. S,fi1u PnuiP. I, U. P'P .1

100. These olbservers- hup;ely. no,l and wen::
not to emil(;l'iU.iol'l noJr Wtl'; lhey pl!lrli,uiH,rly hu'llilc h1' Siiln rn,ul,o nr Br:u1L Nc\tr
theleu. they hielld Uuml lhe cmulilinn"' ln l'hl!:' ..
mhe p,JI.anltac ..iol'll!li were cl!l.lremcly unravounhlc. iuld rTHIM')' lhi'llldH 1hcy
worse tltan i111 nlhcr nf lntlitt: llnlizm, "(:Ukrncnl. 1' .. "' illhl n 111Prt
So P'aulo Coffee Plantations
199
detailed account see M. HalL op.cit.. and l\t Hall. 'Emigrazionc italiana a San Paolo tra
1880 e 1920'. Q.uaderni Srorici. no. 25. 1974.
101. S. Coleui. op.ciL. p. 375 .. '-'Titing in 1908. condudcd however. that thc fall in coffcc prices
had ncver pre'>ented planters from earning a decent profit. if not as splendid a one as in the
pasf. and he further noted that 'it was not so much lhe fall in the price of coffee as the
a.cquisition of already prepared plantations al fabulous priccs. and thc sudden cstablishmcnt
of new ones with money borrowed at very high interest rates. which has led 10 the crisis".
102. S. Coletti. op.cit.. p. 53.
103. P'. Denis. op.cit.. p. 206. Denis considered the estimate- from a gon:rnmcnt source- to be
lliglh. but on one "'elll-run estate between 1895 and 1930 .. half the colonos staycd for
less than 4.5 years. accordi1ng to M.S. !Beozzo Bass:mezi. 'Fazenda Santa Gertrudes: uma
a.bordagem quantitati\a das de lraiJaJIItm em uma propredade rural paulista.
doctoral thesis. Faculdadc dc Filosofia. Ciencias c Letras de Rio Claro. 1973. p. I .53.
1041. A. de Zettil")'. 'I colo11i1 i1taliani dello stalo di S. P'aulo'. La Rassegno Sa=ionale. LXX. 1893.
p. 78: A.L. Rozwa.dowski. 'San Paolo'. in Emigra::.ione e color.rie: racco/ta di rapporti dei rr.
agenti diplomatici e consolari. Rome .. 1893. p. I ii: Emigra=ione agricola al Brasile.
Relazione della Commissione ltaliarra 1912. Bologna. 1913. P' 232.
105. P'. Denis. op.cit.. p. 205.
106. P'. Denis. op.cit. p. 205: .A. Ramos. op.cit.. p. 209. Strik.es usually occurred at thc onscl of
the harHst. si1ncc a delay at that point would immediatcly affect thc quality of rhc coffce.
thus making it thc most stralegicallr efTccti,c momcnlto lry to pul prcssure on plantcrs.
107. There are colourful accounts in Fm!fulla. 5 Oclober. 1900. 20 I'v1ay. 6 July. 21 and 22
October. 190 I .
108. From 1913. lhe annual rcports of thc Patromuo Agricola ( published in thc Boletim do
Departmento Estadrwl dfJ Trahallro and/or in thc Rclaturias of thc Sccrctaria de
Agricult.ura of So l'aulo). usually g;i,vc the numbcrs or rural strikcs which ha,c comc to
their altcntion. and a littlc additi0nal information.
109'. We havc movc:mcnts in M. Hall and V. Stoldc. Grcres de colo11os rw
Primeira Rep1iblica. CEDEC. H Scminilri0 dc dc Trabalho c l\fm-imcnt0s Sociais.
Sio Paulo. 11979. mimcQ; wc h(lpc \Q br ablc !Cl prco;cnl a fullcr rcport in thc ncar futurc.
110. Thc cn/tmatn itar;.cJf rcccin::d con'iidcrahlc rcccnt attcntion. I ntcrprctati0ns which difTcr
.s.ubr;.l:mliallly from our own (and from om: anCllhcr) arc: V. Caldcira rant. 'Do colono an
bnia frin: na agricultura c dn mcrcadCI dc trabalho na Aha
Sornca1han::t dc Cf:BRAP. 19 .. 1977: J. dc St,Ul.a f!.l<lrtins. 0 catirdra da
ttrro. Sii,n Paulo, I!JilJ: C.R. Srh1dcl. Umllf'll\ c mciqr.tinos 110 trrmsirrio dc uma ccrmomia
Rin dc 191Ul: T.ll nrr the tand: Cr!!Jcc cmd
Socif.ty in Srio Pnulo. /.'ii.!lfl 193-1. Chapcl Hili. I9RO.
111. Twn nf 1hc mm! influcnlaal r;,talcmcll!' of 1hc pr,l'ilion" an: A. Guimaracs.
Q'1wtm ll1 ,\'w1 !'twln. IIJfiJ. aml Caio Prado Jr .. ..1. rcmlurcio hrosilcira.
Si11n Pauln, I Q,f,,fl..
112. Thr mnl vehement cl::urn lhal lhc colmwto wn-.. pn t:apilaliq is Jacnh Gorcndcr.
r dn no campo hra..,ilciro'. in l:variqo dc l\.lorais Fillw
rl nl.. Tmhulhmlurn. ,.;n.tlinum f polt"tif"n. S;l,n PaulP. finrcndcr 1hc
'11 lllltrhantlutry mOlk of pHltluclion caidcd hy dt:j)CildcrH pcasam
fnttnr.'. fn <Jnt("IIHlcr fi0\11: .. 11 litlnlhcr nf r.ai)Jrr arhllrary and hi1arre critcria
fur 'l" l."lllllr.a.J..t .. \.d111.:h dn llPI C'\lcnd hcynnd onc mnnlhl and firHb
10

lhilll lhc cu/oiWitl dt)(\ nnl fulftl lll!.:fll. lhl: high rr.oinl nf lhc :lrllcJc OCCllr'- 011
fi'A.j!t 1
1
1 whcn. nfh:r cii.J,hlllllllllt Ihn! lhc pl.:mlrr" pa ... lmc (l!'l'f'l'llo ck pa\tognnllo
lhc co/w1m. 1hc nulhPr lhcll c1111mcrnh:' Ihr alllmah. wlw thcrc: 'a ht
1
r..,
1
.:. a
cnw, i:"lf. n du..:hrl,.. \,\'IIIIe lhC" of j,!ra/1111: prp and chll'kcm
1
.., nnl wilhnul a
200
Sharecropping and Sharecroppers
certain Dis.ney-like chann. it does not enhance one's .confidence in Gorender"s agri.cultural
expertise.
w.e hope it is evident by now tha.t those featmes (such as the food plots) which some
writers h.ave used to clia.ssify the colonalo as non-capitalist s.eem to us tobe best regarded as
simply specific to tbe concn::te condions ofSo P'aulo agriculture in the period. ln any case.
it wouJd be difficult to deny tbat under the colonalo free workers were obliged to sell their
labour power i.n1 tbe market.
113. Francisco de Oliveira,. 'Economia brasileira: critica razo dualisf. Estudos CEBRA P. no.
2. 1972.
1 Sergio Silva.,. 'Ag.ricuJtura e capi.tal:ismo mo Brasir. Conte.-.:to. no. I. 1976. p. 31.
H5. E. Viotti da Costa. 'Colnia.s de parceria'.,. pp. 17.1-2. ln her Da senzala a colonia. Viotti
argued somewhat difTerent.ly.. auributing the failure of sharecropping to the high cost of
prodluction of coffee on account of its very labour-intensive natme. low Ievel of mechanisa-
tion,. and llow cofTee prices., wittJ consequent small profit margins .. which discouraged both
employer;s and labourers. W. DeM, in Ria Clara. while initial'ly arguing that the sharecrop-
ping s.ystem was in fact more profitable than slave la:bour. att.ributes its fa.ilure to the fact
that after the first yeMS free labourers could only be kept working by the use of coercion or
by offering them more favourable con1tra.ct conditions. He suggests that the former would
have req1uired backing by the govemment which was unavai1lable. the latter the pl:mters
themselves w.ere t.mwilling to grant. ideologically incapable as the:r were of dealing with a
genuine proldari,a.t on a purely contractuaJ basis. He condudes that. rather lhan an increase
in productivity or the observance of coflt.mctual rellations. what planters expected of their
labourers was subs.ervienc'e and lioyalty.
11'6. ln ordler to avoid invidious citations. We will only note that this was the argument in M. Hall.
'Origins of Mass Immigration.
] 17. M.J. Valdetaro. op ..cit. p. 9'3. quoting a. planteF whose labourers worked l!ittle and badly.