1831.] Colonial Affairs. 183 



of conversations with Henry's sister, who is made to call Mr. Betty, 

 " a great fish who would swallow her up," but not one word is said of the 

 flogging she is alleged to have got. And this letter concludes with re- 

 flections on the interference of the Rev. Mr. Bridges : " May I not say 

 he is the mainspring in this machine ? He says, he is sorry for Henry 

 Williams to be in such a dismal place as the Rodney-hall, alias St. 

 Thomas-in-the Vale workhouse ; and yet this reverend gentleman has 

 two slaves at this moment in this wretched place." 



The next extracts are given from a letter, dated 4th November, 1829, 

 wherein Whitehouse says, in reference to Williams, (( Such was his 

 punishment in the Rodney-hall workhouse, that in a few weeks he be- 

 came so ill, that the manager had the chains taken from him, and placed 

 him in the hospital, where it was expected he would give up the ghost." 

 " Mr. Betty became exceedingly angry that the manager of the work- 

 house had released him of his chains, said that his sickness was feigned, 

 and that he would remove him to the workhouse of St. Thomas-in-the- 

 East." " His poor wife begged I would undertake the cause of her nearly 

 murdered husband." " I knew of a friendless individual who was thus 

 being literally butchered for no other offence than that of coming to our 

 chapel," and what is now done by this intrepid defender of the oppres- 

 sed ? let him speak for himself. " I sat down and wrote a letter to the 

 editor of the Watchman, under the signature of a subscriber !" In a 

 few days Henry was let out of prison in a very pitiable state. 



There is yet another paper, entitled, " entry in the journal of White- 

 house," of a date prior to that of the last letter, containing a great deal 

 of gossip about an elderly white lady, a Mrs. S., and her methodist 

 slave, George, who was to be summoned as a witness against Henry. 

 " He (George) is a man of an excellent character, as is known to the 

 white people in this neighbourhood, but his offence, like that of Henry, 

 is coming to our chapel. Not long ago he happened to be passing the 

 residence of the rev. rector of this parish, who ordered him to be laid 

 down and flogged ; the order was obeyed, and he received such a severe 

 flagellation that it was with great difficulty lie walked home afterwards, 

 which was not more than a mile distant ; Mrs. S. became indignant at 

 this abominable conduct of the parson, and some time after, as soon as 

 George was able to leave home, she sent him to his honour the custos, 

 with a letter of complaint against the Rev. Mr. Bridges. His honour 

 wrote a letter to Mr. Bridges on the subject, and appointed a day for 

 inquiring into his conduct. The day arrived, and several gentlemen 

 were assembled, whose professed object was to investigate the business, 

 but the rev. gentleman employed a friend of his (?) to compromise the 

 matter with George, which he did, by giving him a trifling sum of 

 money, which he told him he was to consider as satisfaction for the 

 injury Mr. Bridges had done him. This happened but a short time 

 before this rev. gentleman was publicly tried by a special vestry for 

 maltreating a female servant !" But, as if to shew more clearly the 

 animus by which he is governed, Mr. Whitehouse charitably omits to 

 mention that on this charge Mr. Bridges was acquitted ! ! 



It has been with feelings of immeasurable disgust that we have waded 

 through the tissue of cant and malignity exhibited in these papers, 

 and compressed it into as short a statement as possible. Let us now 

 see the proceedings adopted to refute or substantiate these charges. 

 On the 6th of May, 1830, Sir George Murray transmits them to the 

 Earl of Belmore, who, on the 10th of August, writes that he had 



