Rapson 1

Lindsey Rapson

Dr. Zevi Gutfreund

HIST 4197

10 December 2014

Chinese in the Post-Civil War South

"That on the first day of January, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State, the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States, shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free…”

Abraham Lincoln Washington, D.C.

January 1, 1863

A proclamation that echoed straight into the heart of southern society. As the most

controversial document in Lincoln's presidency, it declared free all slaves residing in territory in

rebellion against the federal government. The central element of the Southern economy, slavery,

had been abolished. The American Civil War, 1860-1865, left the United States a changed

nation. The war succeeded in restoring the Union, but questions remained as to what kind of

union it would be. These questions would be answered in the aftermath of the war—the period

known as Reconstruction—1865-1877. These conditions brought about new problems and

opportunities brought about by the process of Reconstruction. Looking to rebuild devastated

lands and negotiate new labor arrangements, an inherently unfair system of sharing labor and

land developed as former slaves demanded wages and former masters strived to maintain profits.

It had a profound impact, not only on the daily lives of plantation owners who relied on slave

labor for their livelihood, but also on the lives of freedmen, immigrants, small farmers, and

women. Reconstruction was a difficult time in our history. And not only for the large plantation

owners, but for every group living in the South, including foreign newcomers. These immigrants

dreamed of making a better life for both themselves and their prosperity. (Jung, Chapter 6)

Rapson 2

Fast-forward a few years and it can be seen that Reconstruction has certainly altered

plantation life. One plantation in particular was built in 1857 by U.S. Rep. Edward James Gay

and named for the City of St. Louis, it was known as the St. Louis Plantation. Located not far

from the Mississippi River, it had six large columns and a gallery across the front, complete with

a rooftop belvedere. The home also had a cellar, which was quite rare among plantations.

However, there was a very different group of workers present on which the hot, Southern sun

was beating down on. A new, unexpected group had taken the place of its’ previous workers in a

region once largely characterized by its’ black-white racial division. Far from home, this group

aimed to make new lives for themselves. The aftermath of the war had forever changed a fine,

large Louisiana estate. Winds of change had come.

The South, "a land of cotton where old times are not forgotten", had developed an

economy based on commercial agriculture made possible by intensive manual labor. Chinese

immigrants had become necessary because Emancipation transformed the South’s entire labor

system. Plantation life had created a society with clear class divisions. It was thought of as a land

of aristocratic planters, beautiful southern belles, poor white trash, faithful household slaves, and

superstitious fieldhands. A lucky few were at the top, with land holdings as far as the eyes could

see. But most Southerners did not experience this degree of wealth. The contrast between rich

and poor was great. This plantation economy proved far less dependent on slavery than slavery

was dependent upon it. The plantation economy survived the elimination of slavery, but not

without modifications. It turns out that slavery was not the only means by which white

southerners could retain a labor force essential to the viability of plantation agriculture.

However, the way in which Southerners should go about devising a new system of labor to

replace the shattered world of slavery proved to be a difficult task. Planters found it hard to

Rapson 3

adjust to the end of slavery. After all, the economic lives of planters, former slaves, and

nonslaveholding whites, were transformed after the Civil War. Accustomed to absolute control

over their labor force, many planters sought to restore the old discipline, only to meet determined

opposition from their workers. Out of the conflicts on the plantations, new systems of labor

slowly emerged to take the place of slavery. Sharecropping dominated the cotton and tobacco

South, while wage labor was the rule on sugar plantations. The postwar South remained

overwhelmingly agricultural. The implements of work were the same as before the war, but

relations between planters, laborers, and merchants had changed forever. (Halpern)

As under slavery, most blacks worked on land owned by whites. But they now exercised

more control over their personal lives. They could come and go more than before, and could

determine which members of the family worked in the fields. As a result, landowners

complained of a persistent “labor shortage” throughout Reconstruction, another way of saying

that free labor could not be controlled as strictly as slave labor. The result: some postwar

Southern farmers were urged to rely more on machinery and less on contract laborers. Although

the system afforded workers some degree of independence, it kept most in a state of poverty and

hindered the South’s economic development. An influx of Northern capital allowed sugar

planters to pay their workers in cash, but conflicts between owners and workers arose over wages

and discipline. Planters who managed to resume production believed it would be next to

impossible to prosper using free black labor. It was widely believed that African-Americans

would work only when forced. Charges of “indolence” were directed not against blacks

unwilling to work at all, but at those who preferred to work for themselves rather than signing

contracts with planters. Many landowners wrote into labor contracts detailed provisions requiring

freedpeople to labor in gangs as under slavery, and obey their employers’ every command. But

Rapson 4

contracts could not create a submissive labor force; because of the labor shortage, dissatisfied

freedpeople could always find employment elsewhere.

Southerners complained of the advantage that the North had in attracting immigrants---

although the North with its different kind of economy could absorb the increase of free people

better than could the South. What Southern planters wanted was more slaves. Cotton production

had been growing, from 160 million pounds in 1820 to around one billion in 1850, and to 2.3

billion pounds in 1860--- a growth of 230 percent in the 1850s. In addition, from the Gold Rush

through the 1870s, a large migration of mostly single male laborers came to San Francisco and

the American West due to hardships brought by flooding in China. The stage had been set.

Research Methodology

Postwar immigration to Louisiana was often a story about the relationship between

planters and imported field laborers. As a result, this paper focuses on three central themes that

help understand this relationship between the planter and immigrant worker. This essay tells the

story of Edward Gay’s efforts to recruit and employ Chinese workers. Gay’s records challenge

the idea that planters sought Chinese workers as a more cost-efficient labor

source. It seeks to understand the motivation of Edward Gay and planters like him, and to

understand the consequences of a labor experiment. The first theme focuses on the plantation

owner, Edward J. Gay, and his work with the labor agents tasked with the job to recruit new

workers. The following theme is central around the planter’s views and experiences, in relation

to the workers on his plantation. The last theme chronologically emphasizes how Gay’s

“immigrant experiment” changed over time: from initial optimism to frustration and lawsuits.

Rapson 5

In reality Gay was exploiting the Chinese, but from his point of view it was not

exploitation.

Historiography

In the book, Coolies and Cane, Moon-Ho Jung argued that Asian coolies were integral to

the construction of race and citizenship in the U.S. nation-state that emerged during the age of

emancipation. The British colonization of India and occupation of Chinese port cities after the

Opium War had facilitated the recruitment and shipment of Asian laborers to its Caribbean sugar

plantations after emancipation. This well-regulated indentured labor system provided a model for

Louisiana planters, who now faced similar circumstances. Former slaveholders in the U.S. South

clamored for imported Asian workers. Louisiana planters, who were particularly plagued by

uncontrollable sugar prices and global labor markets, pinned their hopes on coolies from Cuba

after the Civil War. Coolies in Louisiana were officially portrayed as representing a crucial step

toward a free labor system. As they increased their demand for coolies during the postwar and

Reconstruction era, planters "confronted a widening movement for multiracial democracy and

class struggle. Although initially described as a docile, hardworking labor force, they rebelled,

resisted corporal punishment, wandered from plantations, utilized Chinese middlemen, and made

legal claims to protest breaches of contract.

Jung referenced the Edward J. Gay papers in regards to the experiences of both plantation

owner and the laborers recruited for work on the estates. Jung stated, "In a nation struggling to

define slavery and freedom, coolies seemed to fall under neither yet both; they were viewed as a

natural advancement from chattel slavery and a means to maintain slavery's worst features."

Rapson 6

It’s evident throughout Chapter Six that the life Chinese workers faced on Louisiana

sugar plantations was difficult, but they gained an instant reputation as industrious and faithful

workers. As the Chinese became familiar sights on sugar plantations up and down the

Mississippi River and its bayous, conflicts between management and Chinese laborers also

followed. According to Jung, the recruitment of Chinese workers only produced new sets of

struggles that resolved none of the old. This evidence illustrated some of the experiences that

immigrant laborers faced on Louisiana plantations. As historian Moon-ho Jung explained in his

work Coolies and Cane, “Chinese workers in Louisiana, like gangs of migrant laborers in

general, left behind few records, all too often making their work anonymous, if not invisible, in

contemporary and historical accounts.” This lack of archival sources documenting Chinese

workers’ experiences was one of the shortcomings I encountered in my research. While Jung

does touch upon this idea of archival absences limiting our understanding of the day-to-day lives

of Chinese workers and the conditions under which they lived and worked, he has devoted a

section in his book to providing some insight into what the lives of Chinese workers may have

involved.

Gay’s Work with Labor Agents

In the summer of 1870, sugar planter Edward James Gay was at a loss for what was to be

done about the continuous labor shortages on his Iberville Parish, Louisiana plantation. He had

begun to hire workers, mostly ex-slaves, from outside Iberville Parish, and outside of the state.

But still, Gay and his colleagues wished for a more permanent solution to their woes. By

August 1870, the men settled on a potential answer: they would hire Chinese workers from

Rapson 7

San Francisco with the help of his brother, William Gay, and his business contacts. News of this

alternative labor came first in the form of a warning from Samuel Cranwill, who was Gay’s

plantation manager. In the fall of 1870, Samuel Cranwill successfully brought 52 Chinese

workers from San Francisco to work on Gay’s sugar estate. Gay seemed to be aware that it

would cost him more to hire Chinese workers, but he pursued these workers anyways. He had

hoped Chinese workers would prove less “troublesome” than freedmen. Gay received

a note about Chinese workers from his son, Andrew:

“I think it will be very difficult to get any extra labor about here for taking of the crop

and they will demand high wages. I am told people are offering $50, +$60 per month,

plus feeding them. I think it would be cheaper to send for Chinese from San Francisco at

once.”

Gay even enlisted the services of a Dutch labor merchant, Cornelius Koopmanschap, to help

obtain Chinese workers. (Edward J. Gay and Family Papers, Box 64)

In September 1870, one hundred Chinese workers boarded a train in San Francisco.

The men were bound for Arkansas where they were to begin their term as contracted field hands

for a man known only as Mr. Lombard. Each man had been given twenty-six dollars cash and

whatever personal belongings he could carry. The cash was an advance paid to the workers for

furnishings needed before or during their journey. It was also an incentive. “This will give you

an idea of the tricks these people are up to,” was the closing statement that Louisiana planter

William Gay sent in a letter to his brother, Edward James Gay, on October 3, 1870. The letter

that he received from his brother had been sent from San Francisco where William had also gone

to recruit Chinese workers for the St. Louis plantation. (Edward J. Gay and Family Papers, Box

65)

Rapson 8

The efforts of Edward Gay and his associates to secure non-native workers was an

experiment that lasted only a few years, starting in the late-1860s and concluding by the early-

1870s. But it brought several thousand Chinese to the region. Frustration with the wage labor

system that had succeeded the plantation-based slavery had inspired the Chinese labor

experiment. Gay’s documented experiences clearly bring to light the Chinese labor experiment in

Louisiana and show his eagerness to locate a cheaper source of labor.

Planter’s Views

A planter, merchant, politician, and friend to many of Louisiana’s elite, Edward Gay

represented the epitome of a southern sugar baron in many ways. The plantation remained active

throughout the Civil War, and Gay was able to expand his holdings during the post-war

economic collapse. By 1868, he had purchased or invested in seven plantations. And by 1880 he

had acquired 16 more, eventually becoming one of Louisiana’s wealthiest sugar planters. Gay

had decided to enlist Chinese workers under the assumption that they were bound to be less

“troublesome.” On June 20, 1870, Edward Gay wrote his son-in-law from his home at the St.

Louis plantation and stated, “It is disgusting to have any business with negroes.” It seems that he

was fed up. (Edward J. Gay and Family Papers, Box 63)

The St. Louis Plantation had once housed 223 slaves. It was among the largest in

Iberville, and its’ neighboring Plaquemines Parish, and had been worth an estimated $86,000

before the Civil War. However, by 1870, the slave system that had sustained the plantation and

kept it in good fortune, was no longer. The plantation of Edward Gay, and of sugar planters

throughout Louisiana, had been transformed into sites of wage labor. The strict schedule of

production required a steady and disciplined labor force that “worked with clocklike precision.”

Rapson 9

The notes between the men reveal that they were frustrated most by those workers who they

considered unreliable and prone to absenteeism. But a letter written by Edward Gay in July 1870

suggests that his dissatisfaction may have had other sources. In the letter to his son-in-law, Major

L.L. Butler, Gay complained that just a week before, that five men who had been hired to chop

wood on the St. Louis plantation had abandoned the task before it was completed. He explained

that the issue had been over wages. He often complained about the costs associated with hiring

freedmen. It was this sort of “uncertainty” that proved pivotal in the Gays’ efforts to find a new

and more “reliable” work force. The Gays wanted both a reliable and affordable workforce. They

faced the question on how best to secure such a workforce. Upon learning that Edward Gay had

begun to make inquiries about sending for Chinese workers, Cranwill warned him: “…we trust

you will have nothing to do with the “Pigtail” question more than to investigate it. Planters who

have tried Chinese labor have had a surfeit of it, from all we hear.” (Edward J. Gay and Family

Papers, Box 64)

Edward Gay deemed it would be well worth the risk to find out. This testifies to how

troublesome Gay’s relationship with his workers had become. A letter from William Gay, sent

approximately four months after the arrival of the first Chinese workers to Iberville

Parish points to the men’s initial satisfaction. He wrote:

“We find the Chinese well adapted. We are trying them by task work and find they can

do a good days work, about as quick as the negro.”

(Edward J. Gay and Family Papers, Box 64)

So it seems that for a brief period, the brothers were content with their new workers. In

the same letter, William Gay noted that a Sunday school had been built on his Oaks plantation

for his new workers, and he reminded Edward Gay that with the Chinese New Year approaching,

Rapson 10

there would be a need to grant their workers a few days off. (Edward J. Gay and Family Papers,

Box 67)

The Gays were clearly optimistic that the Chinese immigrants would succeed in

Louisiana, as can be seen through their willingness to accommodate the cultural celebration of

their new workers. But much to their disappointment, the friendly relationship with their Chinese

workers soon changed.

Chronology

The evidence of this transformation can be seen in the brothers’ correspondence, as their

talk of “well adapted” laborers turned to irritated debates about the proper solution for repeated

issues with runaway workers. On June 22, 1871– just seven months after the workers had arrived

– Major L.L. Butler, Edward Gay’s son-in-law, wrote with bad news. Butler explained that

“the Chinese all left this morning early.” This short note was the disappointing end of almost a

year-long effort to hire Chinese workers. The news of the Chinese workers’ disappearance came

two months after Edward J. Gay had sued eight of his workers for breach of contract. The suit

was filed for repeated absenteeism and Gay had demanded compensation as a result of their

expenses in regards to their transportation and employment. The correspondence between the

brothers in the months leading up to the final dissolution of the labor arrangement was filled with

complaints about their absenteeism. William Gay wrote in a letter to his brother warning about

the dishonest nature of their new workers:

“If permitted to go off and hire out whenever they are compelled to do right and work

satisfactorily, then they will all soon disappear.”

(Edward J. Gay and Family Papers, Boxes 68 and 69)

Rapson 11

He also instructed his brother to have his absentee workers arrested on the grounds of “obtaining

money under false pretense” and urged him to “come up and straighten these

Celestials.”

But before Edward Gay could “straighten up” any workers, as his brother suggested,

several more workers left the plantation. The news of this breach of contract was located in

another letter from William Gay, where he said that he had found the men loitering at the

plantation’s ferry terminal. He told his brother in the note that the men had agreed to resume

work the next morning. But he explained that “our intention is not to pay again until each man

works 26 days and pays in addition for his board.” He added: “will try to get even with them

somehow.” In the end, the Gays did not end up retaliating too forcefully and were unsure how to

deal with their labor problems. Much to the disappointment of Edward and William Gay,

however, circumstances did not improve. The friction between William Gay’s overseer and his

Chinese workers only became more intense. He was eventually forced to sell off the contracts for

his workers, and the workers on Edward Gay’s plantation left slowly until none remained.

By July 1871, the experiment was over. They had wanted the arrangement to work, but it

had not. Edward Gay and his brother had been familiar with the risks the whole time. They were

given reasons not to hire the Chinese but the men continued in their efforts. But this may be

because many planters at this time thought Chinese workers would be the “cheap, durable, and

easily exploited” labor, and hopefully a replacement for freedmen. (Edward J. Gay and Family

Papers, Box 69)

The failure of the experiment with Chinese workers was one more disappointment in a

series of efforts to maintain an adequate source of labor for the plantations. By the fall of 1871,

Rapson 12

one year after William T. Gay had traveled to San Francisco to recruit Chinese, his nephew

Edward J. Gay, Jr., was sent to Chicago to recruit Scandinavian laborers who were reported to be

available for the next planting season. His uncle, Edward, Jr., also explored various labor sources

to meet the growing demands of the plantations. The system of contract labor used to recruit

Chinese for plantations did not succeed, even with the initial enthusiasm of agents and

entrepreneurs. The resentment expressed by the Chinese toward their southern employers, could

not be fixed by either employer or employees. The contract system of labor was partially blame

for the failure of experiment of using Chinese workers on southern plantations. (Edward J. Gay

and Family Papers, Box 74)

Contracts for service, engaging workers for a designated time period during which they

were to repay costs of transportation and other advances, were not limited to the Chinese. A

labor contract system for freedmen had been established by Louisiana planters under the

authorization of the army of occupation of the Freedmen’s Bureau. In the years 1864-1866,

Negro laborers were given the opportunity to sign up for a year, and contracts included

regulations to ensure maintenance of discipline and control. Freedmen, however, preferred urban

employment than to work on plantations under a contract which regulated hours and wages,

levied fines for disobedience, and stipulated that they could not leave the plantation without the

permission of the employer.

The experiences with the Chinese, in which planters changed or manipulated the contract

at their pleasure, had not yielded positive results either. The social organization of the Chinese

work groups, in which intermediaries were used to defend the workers’ interests, was in basic

conflict with southern ideas about labor. Chinese head men or interpreters, who were experts in

the fine art of bargaining, expected to use their skills in labor negotiations. Southern planters,

Rapson 13

however, had not wished to negotiate on terms of employment. They believed themselves to be

the one authority in setting work agreements with employees.

The most serious problem with labor contracts was enforcement. Edward. J. Gay

unsuccessfully brought suit against the Chinese for failing to fulfill their contracts. The courts

had not chosen to punish Chinese laborers for deserting from service. The efforts of the Chinese

to sue their former employers for violating their contracts or infringing other of their rights was

also unfulfilled. The employers were powerful in their communities to influence judges or the

courts so that judgments were always in their favor. As sharecropping and tenantry replaced the

contract labor experiments in the South, some Chinese became a part of that labor system. Others

established themselves in towns near or in large cities such as New Orleans. No more attempts

were made to import Chinese directly from China. The Chinese increasingly assumed control

over their own lives in the South, as it is shown by descriptions of early settlements in New

Orleans and outlying towns and rural areas. Gay learned that hiring Chinese workers was not

cheaper, but, in fact, more expensive than hiring freedmen. The labor force that was meant to

replace the freedmen proved more troublesome than Gay and his fellow planters imagined. The

initial liking that Gay and his fellow planters felt toward their new workers quickly diminished:

contract disputes and absenteeism led Gay and his colleagues to abandon their experiment.

(Edward J. Gay and Family Papers, Box 68) (Jung, Chapter 6)

Parting Thoughts

After the Civil War, Southern plantation owners--who were worried that freed slaves

would be "unmanageable"--considered substituting Chinese coolie labor for black labor. They

had begun to eye the Chinese as possible substitutes for their former human property. Southern

Rapson 14

plantation owners had visited California with this in mind. And during the 1870s, Chinese

workers were imported to states like Louisiana and Mississippi and pitted against black workers.

Eventually, plantation owners in the South stopped importing Chinese labor as the system of

sharecropping had become established. But Chinese laborers continued to be used in other parts

of the world to replace black slaves. (Jung, Chapter 6)

It should have been an ideal match. After all, according to reports from California,

Chinese laborers were docile and hardworking. It led one to ask: Why should they be less so as

field hands than as gold miners and railroad workers? If the Chinese would be willing to work

according to the terms that had prevailed under slavery, perhaps the emancipated blacks could be

persuaded to return to their former condition as well. (Jung, Chapter 6)

Both the Southern planters and the Chinese laborers quickly became disillusioned. The

plantation owners had become accustomed to exerting absolute control over their workers. They

believed that the way to increase productivity was to have overseers whip men into docility. But

the Chinese considered their relationship to the planters to be a normal business arrangement.

They expected their employers to adhere to the terms of their contracts, and had no intentions of

laboring under oppressive conditions. Unlike the former slaves, the Chinese laborers worked

under contract, and they proved to be sharp negotiators, hiring bilingual interpreters and lawyers

to protect their interests. When employers violated contracts, the Chinese filed lawsuits. Within a

few years, most of the Chinese had walked away from their contracts and moved to cities, where

they accepted real jobs or opened their own businesses. By 1915 there was almost no Chinese

workers on Southern plantations. The Southern planters’ dream of holding Chinese workers in

bondage had turned out to be a nightmare. (Jung, Chapter 6)

Rapson 15

Works Cited

Secondary Sources

Halpern, Rick. “Solving the ‘Labour Problem:’ Race, Work, and the State in the

Sugar Industries of Louisiana and Natal, 1870-1910,” Journal of Southern

African Studies, Vol. 30, no. 1 (2004): 19-40

Jung, Moon-Ho. Coolies and Cane: Race, Labor, and Sugar in the Age of

Emancipation. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2006. Chapter 6:

Resisting Coolies.

Shanabruch, Charles. The Louisiana Immigration Movement, 1891-1907: An Analysis of

Efforts, Attitudes, and Opportunities. 2nd ed. Vol. 18. Chicago: Louisiana Historical

Association, 1977. 203-226.

Primary Sources

Louisiana State University, Hill Memorial Library, Baton Rouge Special Collection,

Louisiana and Lower Mississippi Valley Collections (LLMVC)

Edward J. Gay and Family Papers (Mss. #1295)

Box 61: December 14, 1869

Box 63: June 20, 1870

Box 64: September 7, 8, 9, 12, 15, 1870

Box 65: October 3, 15, 1870

Box 67: February 13, 1871

Box 68: April 26, 1871

Box 69: August 11, 1871

Box 73: April 26, 1872

Box 74: July 21, 1872