THE BAHAMA ISLANDS 567 



and not in the force of numbers." '" Fortunately for the peace of the Colony 

 these things were only significant of individual disafEection or ambition. No 

 organization appeared to give cause for concern. Some violence occurred 

 on the part of a body of Americans and others, during the negotiations over 

 the disputed boundary between the United States and Canada, but there was 

 no serious outbreak."* 



Governor Mathevf and Archdeacon Trew. 



Governor Mathew was not allowed to go through his whole administration 

 in quiet. IJis private character was irreproachable, but it was on this side 

 that he was attacked. Archdeacon Trew of the Bahamas was his chief 

 assailant. Angered by a fancied personal slight, he set to work to secure the 

 downfall of the Governor. He complained to the Colonial Department in 

 London, published a letter in the London Times falsely representing the 

 Governor's position,"" and was joined by unprincipled persons in spreading 

 infamous reports connecting the Governor with a fallen woman.'" A plot 

 was formed, and the Receiver-General's office became the meeting-place of the 

 parties, where invectives were loudly declaimed against Governor Mathew."" 

 Petitions were sent to London and to the bishop of Jamaica praying for his re- 

 call. The archdeacon called a meeting of the local clergy, and rushed through 

 it without discussion a set of previously prepared resolutions denouncing this 

 alleged misconduct of the head of the government."" Accusations were kept 

 up until the autumn of 1848. But the evidence in the affair was not all 

 against the Governor. The bishop,"" the local clergy, both Anglican and 

 sectarian,""" the members of the two legislative bodies, and the general public,""' 

 refused to believe in the accusations. The bishop reprimanded the archdeacon, 

 and refused to admit him to holy orders. Finally the haughty ecclesiastic was 

 humbled. He could gain no general credence for his accusations. He re- 

 pented of his unprovoked course, but blundered again in attempting to make 



»" H. v., 1846-7, p. 117. 



"* Mathew to Gladstone, No. 43. 



™ Mathew to Stanley, separate Ds. of Jan. 10, 1846; also of Dec. 19, 1848. 



™ Mathew to Stanley, separate Ds. of Sept. 9, 1848. 



"' Mathew to Grey, No. 14. 



™See Mathew to Grey, separate Ds. of Dec. 19, 1848, Nos. 1 and 2; also Ds. 

 No. 148 (1848); also letter to the Bishop of Jamaica of Sept. 23, 1848, in Misc. 

 Letter Book of Governors, 1838-50. 



""Mathew to Grey, separate Ds. of Dec. 19, 1848. 



•^ hoc. cit. Ds. of Sep. 25 and Dec. 19, 1848. 



"'Enclosures in Ds. of Mathew to Grey, No. 14 (1849). 



