This article examines how child labour in British South India, though rooted in household poverty, was sustained and legitimised, and factory reform narrowed, through the administrative and legal machinery of the colonial state, rather than extended and reformed as in Britain. Focusing on Malabar and the adjacent districts of the Madras Presidency, it traces how William Logan, Collector of Malabar, and European firms mobilised opinion against the child labour protections proposed in the Draft Factory Bill of 1879. Although the Government of India proceeded with the Bill, making it permissive, the Indian Factories Act of 1881 defined a ’factory’, narrowly exempting plantations. Drawing on Foucault’s governmentality, nondecision-making, mobilisation of bias, and managed administrative delay, this article develops two concepts. Hybrid bureaucracy describes how colonial administration borrowed the formal British governance procedures while serving European commercial interests. Calculated governance captures how consultation, referral, and empirical inquiry were deployed not to produce deliberation but to construct a record that legitimised a narrower reform and converted commercial lobbying into official knowledge. Officials and firms turned poor families’ dependence on children’s earnings into a racialised justification for limiting protection, and claims about industrious habits and the harmlessness of seasonal work entered the record unscrutinised.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abraham et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: