DR RITA PEMBERTON

After Emancipation there was a rising underbelly of resistance in Tobago against the oppressive policies inflicted on the working class. These policies sought to force them to give their labour to plantation owners under terms that were reminiscent of the era of enslavement.

Each time an event that threatened the already frail life of the sugar industry occurred, the planters increased the workload of their workers, reduced wages, and used their positions in the assembly to impose other restrictive measures on the workers.

One of their favourite control mechanisms was taxation, which, in their minds, would give the workers no choice but to give their labour to the plantations in order to be able to pay the taxes. But the expected outcomes of the tax-to-dependency strategy were never realised, because taxation was the bête noire of the freed Africans.

Contrary to the expectations of the planting community, each imposition of restrictive taxation stimulated a sharp, determined resistance response from the island's workers. Although it was never clear to the planters and their ruling-class supporters, each such law added fuel to the fire of resistance on the island.

The workers engaged in several forms of non-confrontational resistance strategies which allowed them to continue working within the exploitative system. That way they were able to take advantage of those opportunities that were of benefit to them, while silently undermining it.

But there were instances when intolerance overflow led to violent and confrontational resistance, such as what occurred in1867 with the Dog Tax Act.

This act, approved and implemented by the House of Assembly, imposed a six-shilling ($1.44) licence for all dogs, which was payable by May every year. Payments could be made up to 60 days after the date specified in the act. Anyone who failed to comply would be convicted and mandated to pay 20 shillings ($4.80) in penalties for each unlicensed dog in their possession. In order to ensure compliance with the law, police constables, who were used as informants, were rewarded for their efforts.

This law was a stroke against hunters, who normally kept several dogs, which were essential to their trade. Many workers turned to hunting to supplement their incomes. The thinly veiled intent of this law was to curtail any activity that might contribute to the possibility of independent earnings off the plantations. To make it effective, informants were positioned as stakeholders, incentivised with a portion of the returns.

Fed up with the depressingly low wages and the constant attempts to reduce them further, increased taxation and the growing number of oppressive laws, the incensed residents of Mason Hall were unified in their opposition to the Dog Tax Act and were determined to challenge the law and the lawmakers.

When 100 villagers were convicted under the act, they vehemently refused to pay the tax. On August 8, 1867, they stat