was not informed of the affair. His sister was also sick of a fever, accompanied with delirium. His mother applied to the King and Queen of England, to interest them in favour of her son. In addition to this, she wrote the following letter to Count de Vergennes, a French Minister.

Letter from Lady Asgill to the Comte de Vergennes.

SIR,

If the politeness of the French court will permit a stranger to address it, it cannot be doubted but that she who unites in herself all the more delicate sensations with which an individual can be penetrated, will be received favourably by a nobleman, who reflects honor not only on his nation, but on human nature. The subject on which I implore your assistance, is too heart rending to be dwelt on; most probably, the public report of it has already reached you; this relieves me from the burthen of so mournful a duty. My son, my only son, dear to me as he is brave, amiable as he is beloved, only nineteen years of age, a prisoner of war, in consequence of the capitulation of Yorktown, is at present confined in America as an object of reprisal. Shall the innocent share the fate of the guilty? Figure to yourself, Sir, the situation of a family in these circumstances. Surrounded as I am with objects of distress, bowed down by fear and grief, words are wanting to express what I feel, and to paint such a scene of misy my husband, given over by his physicians some hours before the arrival of this news, not in a condition to be informed of it; my daughter attacked by a fever, accompanied with delirium, speaking of her brother in tones of wildness, and without an interval of reason, unless it be to listen to some circumstances which may console her heart. Let your sensibility, Sir, paint to you my profound, my inexpressible misery, and plead in my favor; a word, a word from you, like a voice from Heaven, would liberate us from desolation, from the last degree of misfortune. I know how far General Washington reveres your character. Tell him only that you wish my son restored to liberty, and he will restore him to his desponding family; he will restore him to happiness. The virtue and courage of my son will justify this act of clemency. His honor, Sir, led him to America; he was born to abundance, to independence, and to the happiest prospects. Permit me, once more to entreat the interference of your high influence in favor of innocence, and in the cause of justice and humanity. Despatch, Sir, a letter from France to General Washington, and favor me with a copy of it, that it may be transmitted from hence. I feel the whole weight of the liberty taken in presenting this request. But I feel confident, whether granted or not, that you will pity the distress by which it is suggested; your humanity will drop a tear on my fault and blot it out forever.

May that Heaven which I implore, grant that you may never need the consolation which you have it in your power to bestow THERESA ASGILL.”

on

This remarkable letter, accompanied by one from Count de Vergennes, was sent to General Washington. The Count's letter contained the following passage:

"Your Excellency will not read this letter (Lady Asgill's,) without being extremely affected. It thus affected the King and Queen, to whom I communicated it. The goodness of their Majesties' hearts induces them to desire that the inquietudes of an unfortunate mother may be calmed, and her tenderness reassured. There is one consideration, Sir, which, though not decisive, may have an influence on your resolution. Capt. Asgill is doubtless your prisoner, but he is among those whom the arms of the King contributed to put into your hands at Yorktown. Though this circumstance does not operate as a safeguard, it however justifies the interest I permit myself to take in the affair. In seeking to deliver Mr. Asgill from the fate which threatens him, I am far from engaging you to seek another victim;-the pardon, to be perfectly satisfactory, must be entire."

Dr. Thacher, from whose "Military Journal" these facts are taken, proceeds to say,-" Copies of these letters being transmitted, with one from his Excellency to Congress, they resolved, Nov. 7th, that the Commander in Chief be directed to set Capt. Asgill at liberty. A more grateful duty could scarcely be assigned; it relieved his mind from a weight which had long oppressed and preyed on his spirits. He immediately transmitted to Capt. Asgill a copy of the resolution of Congress, accompanied with a passport for him to go into New York, and also a letter, which closed as follows:

"I cannot take leave of you, Sir, without assuring you that in whatever light my agency in this unpleasant affair may be viewed, I was never influenced, through the whole of it, by sanguinary motives; but by what I conceived to be a sense of my duty, which loudly called on me to take measures, however disagreeable, to prevent a repetition of those enormities which have been the subject of discussion. And that this important end is likely to be answered without the effusion of the blood of an innocent person, is not a greater relief to you, than it is, Sir, to your most obedient, humble servant, GEORGE WASHINGTON."

Capt. Asgill was kept in a state of anxious suspense about eight months, and a multitude of people in Europe and in this

country, became deeply interested for him. During this trying affair, Sir Guy Carleton took the place of Sir Henry Clinton, as Commander in Chief of the British forces in New York. In the preceding years of the war, he had been Governor General of Canada; and by his clemency towards our men who fell into his hands as prisoners of war, he had acquired a greater share of esteem among the Americans than any other British general. He interested himself in favour of Asgill, and corresponded with General Washington, assuring him that he disapproved of the murder of Capt. Huddy. The character of this humane commander might naturally have considerable influence on the mind of Washington, as it afforded much assurance that such murders would not be repeated. After his release, Captain Asgill soon returned to England, to the inexpressible joy of his anxious mother. Though exhausted by suffering, she wrote another letter to the Count de Vergennes, in which she expressed her gratitude to him, and to the King and Queen of France, in the most feeling manner, and in the strongest language.

We have now before us the principal facts relating to the affair of Captain Asgill; in view of which we may inquire and reflect.

1. Why was the murder of Huddy any more criminal or atrocious than if he had been slain in battle? If he deserved death, or if, the men who hanged him, had a right to kill him before he was a prisoner, why not after he was taken? The difference in the two cases results only from the modern usages of war. In ancient times it was deemed right to kill captives. Let us be grateful for the progress of humanity thus far; but let us not be blind to what is still barbarous.

2. "Shall the innocent share the fate of the guilty?" So pleaded Lady Asgill in behalf of her son; and her plea was heard. In this case, all the parties concerned appeared to feel the injustice and cruelty of retaliating on Asgill the crime of Lippincot in the murder of Huddy. But who of them reflected on the fact, that the whole business of war is conducted on principles equally inhuman and unjust? In nine instances out of ten, the sufferings of war fall on persons as innocent of the wrongs for which the evils are inflicted, as Asgill was of the murder of Huddy! The rulers of two nations quarrel, and appeal to the sword.-But who is expected to be killed in the contest? Not the rulers, but their unoffending subjects.

3. Aside from the barbarity of the principle of retaliation, as applied in the case of Asgill, what shall we say of its policy, as a means of preventing wrongs? Is it good policy to retaliate enormity by enormity? It is believed that the practice is as impolitic, as it is barbarous and antichristian. Had Asgill been executed, the probability is, that his death would have been revenged by other murders. To overcome evil with good is the best policy, as well as a christian duty. Had Major Andre, who was hanged as a spy, been exempted from that fate by the clemency of Washington, it would probably have had a salutary effect in abating the asperities and rigors of the war. As both parties lamented the fate of this amiable man, what advantages could be expected from his execution? Surely it did not prevent, nor could it have been expected to prevent the employment of spies. For while Andre was under sentence of death as a spy, General Washington caused Champe to go into New York as a spy, in the hope that he would take Arnold, and that, by executing him, Andre might be saved from the gallows. That the laws of war required Andre's life is granted; and it is not doubted that Washington really thought it to be his duty to cause the sentence to be executed. But the laws of war are but the laws of barbarism; and the most humaze Generals are liable to be blinded by military customs.

4. We may reflect on the power of female eloquence, when employed in the cause of justice and humanity. The plea of Lady Asgill penetrated the hearts of men in power,-the hearts, not only of her friends, but her political enemies, and proved a means of saving her son from an undeserved and ignominious death. How great then would be the effect if the females of all ranks and all countries should raise their voices to prevent war,-to save their brothers, their sons and their husbands from being sacrificed for wrongs which they never committed? When a war is about to be waged between two powerful nations, how many thousands of women might justly adopt the words of Lady Asgill:- Shall the innocent share the fate of the guilty ?" Shall our sons be exposed to perish for the offences of deluded or ungodly rulers? Or shall they be called to expose their own lives in attempting to kill men as innocent as themselves? The influence of mothers, thus exerted might be of great use; but of still greater use if employed in training up their sons in a just abhorrence of fashionable murder.

From the letter of Lady Asgill, it is evident that she was not aware that her son, while fighting the Americans, was acting on the principle of retaliation which she so justly reprobated. Yet that war, as well as wars in general, was on both sides, prosecuted on the principle of retaliating real or alleged wrongs, to prevent further injuries. The plea, therefore, of this lady might have been urged when her son was about to engage in that unnatural contest, with as much propriety as after he was selected by lot to perish on the gallows. Let then all ladies, and females of all ranks, raise their voices to save their dearest relatives from perishing for the offences of other people. And let men be duly apprised of the fact, that those who are sacrificed in the wars of nations, generally perish as unjustly as Capt. Asgill would have suffered, had he been hanged for the crime of Capt. Lippincot in the murder of Capt. Huddy.

REVIEW OF MILITARY BARTER.

MERCANTILE barter is the exchanging of one commodity for another, on such terms as are agreed on by the parties. Savages of newly discovered countries have often exchanged things of great value for worthless trinkets or baubles. But the folly thus displayed is as nothing, when compared with what commonly occurs in military barter, even among the most enlightened nations. Under the denomination of military barter may be included the exchanges made by the violence of men in duelling and in public war.

In duelling, the parties mutually offer or hazard their own lives, and the happiness of their relatives, for the gratification of their revengeful passions, or for the praise which folly bestows on fighting valor. In some instances neither party lives to enjoy the expected bauble. In other cases, while one falls a sacrifice to madness, the other lives to bear the reproach of a murderer in the view of enlightened men.

Duels are generally occasioned by some reproachful remark or imputation, but seldom by an accusation of a nature so serious as that of murder. The party accused, by attempting to take the life of the accuser, does nothing to prove that he is not as bad a man as he had been represented. It is a common saying, that "He that will steal will lie ;" what then is too bad to be done by a murderer? The duel has never proved a man to be good, but it has often proved a man to be worse