secure the possession of what he had so unjustly retained, ran to the palace of Mahomet, whom he found administering justice; and raising his voice, entreated that he would punish a slave for aspersing his "untainted character." But Almoullah, conscious of his integrity, had undauntedly followed him; and obtaining leave of the dey, he told his story, with circumstantial firmness, and then prostrated himself on the carpet at the foot of the throne. Mahomet, having heard him, beckoned to a chiaoux, or minister of justice; "Go," said he, " to the house of Hadgi, search. it narrowly, and bring hither all the money you find in it.” The chiaoux bowed, obeyed, and soon after returned. The dey having then ordered a new earthen pot with clean water poured into it, and a charcoal fire to be placed before him, he put the pot on the fire, and when the water boiled, he threw in the money. Soon after, having taken it out, and letting the water stand till it cooled, he found on the surface a thick greasy scum. This convincing him that the money belonged to the oil man, he instantly restored it to him: and at the same time, gave a sign to the chiaoux, who, dragging away the self-condemned and convicted Moor, fixed his head, without loss of time, on the wall of the city.

MYSTERIOUS EXECUTION OF A VEILED LADY.

AN occurrence of a most remarkable and enigmatical nature, took place in Germany, about the year 1774; the circumstance is related thus:-It is well known that the boureau, or public executioner of the city of Strasburgh, although that place had formed a part of the French monarchy ever since the reign of Louis XIVth, yet was frequently employed, during a great part of the last century, to execute the functions of his office on the other side of the Rhine, in Swabia, in the territories of Baden, and in the Brisgau, all of which countries constitute a portion of Germany. Some persons who arrived at Strasburgh about the period alluded to, having repaired, as it is said, to the house of the executioner during the night demanded that he

should instantly accompany them out of the town, in order to execute a criminal of condition, for which service he should of course receive a liberal remuneration. They particularly enjoined him to bring the sword with which he was accustomed, in the discharge of his ordinary functions, to behead malefactors. Being placed in a carriage, with his conductors, he passed the bridge over the river to Kehl, the first town on the eastern bank of the Rhine, where they acquainted him that he had a considerable journey to perform, the object of which must be carefully concealed, as the person intended to be put to death was an individual of great distinction. They added, that he must not oppose their taking the proper precautions to prevent his knowing the place to which he was to be conveyed. He acquiesced, and allowed them to hoodwink him. On the second day, they arrived at a moated castle, the drawbridge of which being lowered, they drove into the court; after waiting a considerable time, he was then conducted into a spacious hall, where stood a scaffold hung with black cloth, and in the centre was placed a stool or chair. A female shortly made her appearance, habited in deep mourning, her face wholly concealed by a veil. She was led by two persons, who, when she was seated, having first tied her hands, next fastened her legs with cords. As far as he could form any judgment from her general figure, he considered her to have passed the period of youth. Not a word was uttered; neither did she make any complaint, nor attempt any resistance. When all the preparations for her execution were completed, on a signal given, he unsheathed the instrument of punishment, according to the practice adopted in the German empire, where the axe is rarely or never used for decapitation, and her head being forcibly held up by the hair, he severed it at a single stroke from her body. Without allowing him to remain more than a few minutes, he was then handsomely rewarded, conducted back to Kehl by the same persons who had brought him to the place, and set down at the end of the bridge leading to Strasburgh.

A great many opinions have been stated relative to the lady thus put to death. The most general belief is, that it was Augusta Elizabeth, Princess of Tour and Saxis, and daughter of Charles Alexander, Prince of Wirtemburg.

She had been married at a very early age to Charles Anselm, Prince of Tour and Saxis. Whether it proceeded from mutual incompatibility of character, or, as was commonly pretended, from the Princess' untractable and ferocious disposition, the marriage proved eminently unfortunate in its results. She was accused of having repeatedly attempted to take away her husband's life, particularly whilst they were walking together near the castle of Donau Stauff, on the high bank overhanging the Danube, when she endeavored to precipitate him into the river. It is certain that about 1773 or 1774, a final separation took place between them, at the prince's solicitation. The reigning duke of Wirtemburg, her brother, to whose custody she was consigned, caused her to be closely immured in a castle within his own dominions, where she was strictly guarded, no access being allowed to her. However, her decease was not formally announced till many years subsequent to 1778, but this circumstance by no means militates against the probability of her having suffered by a more summary process, if her conduct had exposed her to merit it, and if it was thought proper to inflict upon her capital punishment.

The private annals of the great houses and sovereigns of the German empire, if they were divulged, would furnish numerous instances of similar severity exercised in their own families, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Count Koningsmark fell a victim at Hanover to the resentment of Ernest Augustus, father of George the First, and we know how narrowly the great Frederick, afterwards king of Prussia, escaped falling by the same weapon which beheaded his companion Kaat, arbitrarily sacrificed by Frederick William the First, for only endeavoring to facilitate the prince's evasion from his father's court. But notwithstanding these reasonable conjectures, nothing certain has ever been discovered as to who the lady was, thus secretly punished or sacrificed.

THE ASSASSIN OF SMOLENSKO.

THE following dreadful event lately occurred in the neighborhood of Smolensko, in Russia. The owner of a lonely cottage being out on the chase, a beggar, to all appearance old and weak, entered it at noon-day, and asked alms of the woman who was at home with only her two young children. The kind-hearted woman invites him to rest himself, while she goes out to get something for him to eat and drink. After the beggar had satisfied his hunger, he, to the no small astonishment of the woman, assumed a different language, and with a threatening voice, demanded the money which he knew, he said, her husband had in the house. The wretch rushing on her with a large bread knife, to force her to acknowledge where it was deposited, she declared herself ready to give him what money she had, and for this purpose mounted a ladder to a trap door leading to the loft above. As soon as she had mounted she drew up the ladder after her, so that it was impossible for him to get at her. Finding that she disregarded his menaces, he seized the two children, and swore he would either kill or maim them, if she did not immediately come down and deliver him the money as she had promised. The woman, however, remained in the loft, and endeavored to force a hole through the thatch, and call for help. While she was thus employed, the monster cut off the children's ears and noses; and at last killed the poor maimed innocents, scornfully proclaiming to the mother the murder he had committed. The latter having with great exertions made a hole in the roof, called aloud for help. Her cries were heard by an officer, who was passing by in an open carriage, who sent his servant (while he remained sitting in the carriage,) to inquire what was the matter. The servant hastened to the spot, but on entering the cottage was met by the murderer, who plunged the knife into his heart, so that he fell and expired without a groan. The officer, surprised at his delay, went himself to the cottage, where perceiving the horrid scene, he attempted to stop the flight of the murderer, and with his sabre cut off all the fingers of his right hand, but was not able to hinder him

from embracing the opportunity to escape through the door as it stood open. The woman had, while all this was passing, made her way through the roof, and run to the village, which was at a pretty considerable distance, to fetch assistance. Meantime the husband, on his way home, meets the blood-stained murderer, whom he recognizes as the beggar who frequents that part of the country. The hypocrite concealing his fears under affected lamentation, held up his mutilated hand, saying :-"Make haste! there is in your house a murderer, an officer, who has killed your children, and likewise a man who attempted to defend them, and from whom I have narrowly escaped in the condition you see." The terrified countryman, while the atrocious villain hastens to escape, flies with his loaded gun in his hand, to his cottage, perceives through the open door the officer and the bloody corpses of his children, takes him of course for the murderer, levels his piece, and shoots him dead on the spot! The wife coming up with villagers, hears the shot, sees the officer fall, utters a piercing cry, and exclaims :-"What have you done? You have killed our deliverer-not he, but the beggar is the murderer of our children!" The husband, whose whole frame is shaken by the horror of the scene, and still more by his own rash deed, stands a few moments petrified and motionless, falls back in a fit and expires.

PIOUS FRAUD OF THE DOMINICAN MONKS.

THE two orders of Franciscans and Dominicans had been at open enmity with each other ever since the thirteenth century. The latter had lost a great part of their credit with the people, on account of their not paying so much honor to the Virgin Mary, as their antagonists the Franciscans, and their agreeing with St. Thomas d'Aquinas, in denying her the privileges of having been born without sin. The Franciscans, on the other hand, gained ground daily, by preaching upon all occasions the doctrine of immaculate conception, maintained by St. Bonaventure. The mutual hatred between these two orders was so great, that in 1503, a Franciscan