CAPTAIN SMITH'S MONUMENT.

A gentleman of Albemarle, who has visited London, (and is now residing, we believe, in New York,) in a letter to a friend in this city, gives an interesting notice of Capt. Smith's Monument, which we are permitted to copy for the gratification of our readers, as follows:

Castle Hill, March 16, 1847.

MY DEAR SIR:

In a short conversation which I had the pleasure to hold with you, at the last meeting of the "Home Club," in reference to our early Virginia History, I observed I did not believe it was generally known that Captain John Smith was buried in Saint Sepulchre's church, Skinner Street, London. In pursuance of your suggestion, on that occasion, I cheerfully communicate to you the information I picked up on this subject, feeling assured that however slight it is, its connection with the name foremost in our colonial annals, will prevent its being unacceptable to so devoted an enquirer as yourself.

From "Stowe's Survey of London," printed in 1633, two years after the death of Captain John Smith, it appears there was a tablet erected to his memory, in Saint Sepulchre's, inscribed with his motto, Vincere est Vivere," and the following ver

ses:

Here lies one conquer'd that hath conquer'd Kings
Subdu'd large Territories and done things
Which to the World impossible would seeme,
But that the truth is held in more esteeme.
Shall I report his former service done
In honor of God and Christendome,

How that he did divide from Pagans three
Their Heads and Lives Types of his Chivalry,
For which great service in that Climate done
Brave Sigismundus (King of Hungarion)
Did give him as a coat of armes to weare

Those conquer'd heads got by his sword and speare.
Or shall I tell of his adventures since

Done in Virginia that large Continence,
How that he subdu'd Kings unto his yoke

And made those heathen flie as wind doth smoke,
And made their land, being of so large a station,
A habitation for our Christian nation,
Where God is glorifi'd, their wants suppli'd
Which else for necessaries might have di'd
But what availes his conquests now he lyes
Inter'd in earth a prey for Worms and Flies.
O may his soule in sweet Elizium sleepe
Until the keeper that all soules dothe keepe
Returne to Judgment and that after thence

With angels he may have his recompence.—

This tablet was destroyed by the great fire in 1666, together with most of the monumental antiquities of the church; and all now remaining to the memory of Captain Smith is a large flat stone, in front of the Communion-Table, engraved with his coat of arms. The three Turks' heads are still distinguishable, but in a few years more they will be entirely effaced by the many feet which every Sunday unconsciously trample upon the tomb of so famous a man.

To C. R., Esq.

I remain, &c.

F. R. R.

FORT GEORGE.

We are indebted to an esteemed correspondent, who resides near Old Point Comfort, for the following description of the remains of an old fort built many years ago at that place, which will be interesting to some of our readers. We regret that we cannot copy the drawing which ac

companies the communication, and which is very neatly done; but we have as yet no type for such things.

Oliveira, near Old Point Comfort, March 22, 1847.

It was in the reign of Charles 1st, and during the administration of Sir John Harvey, as Governor of Virginia, that the General Assembly, in their session of 1629-30, passed an Act for the erection of a Fort at Point Comfort.

Capt. Robert Ffelgate, Capt. Thos. Purfury, Capt. Th. Graies, Capt. John Uty, Capt. Thomas Willoby, Mr. Thos. Heyrick and Lieut. Wm. Perry, were appointed "to view the place, conclude what manner of fforte shall be erected, and to compound and agree with Capt. Samuel Mathewes, for the building, raysing and finishing the same."

This is probably the same "worthy Samuel Mathews, an old Planter of more than forty years standing," who was elected Governor in 1658 and died in 1660, so that he must have been in the Colony prior to 1617.

The work was called Fort George. The front lines only and part of the flanks are now traceable, the rear lines having been obliterated by the excavation of the ditch of Fort Monroe; so that it is now impossible even to surmise what the form of the work was; and it is much to be regretted, that the trace of this interesting relic of our earliest attempt at regular fortification had not been preserved, before it was blotted out by the colossal structure of the present day.

It was built of brick and shell lime; and judging from the quality of the materials and character of the masonry, the contractor executed his work most faithfully. Had it been otherwise, he, in all probability, would never have been elected Gov

ernor.

The bricks appear to have been home-made; they were well burned but rough, 9 inches long, 4 wide and 3 thick. The lime was probably burned in the neighbourhood; most probably on the farm where I now reside, being the nearest and most acces

sible point, about a mile and a half from the fort. When I purchased it, I found at the mouth of Jones' Creek, buried in a dense forest of pines, a mound five or six feet high, with a base of about twenty-five feet, overgrown with grass, rank weeds and shrubs. It consisted entirely of shells and fragments of shells, half burned, what is commonly called the core of a lime kiln. The mass was evidently too large to have been the refuse of a kiln burned for any private purpose. Fragments of pottery were found in considerable quantities interspersed amongst the shells. Fort George consisted of an exterior and interior wall about -sixteen feet apart; the exterior twenty-seven and the interior eighteen inches thick. These were connected by counterforts ten or twelve feet apart, forming a system of cribs, which were no doubt filled up with sand. The foundation of the work is three feet below the present level of the sand at the Light-House.

Through the politeness of Mr. Wm. McClean, who aided me in tracing the lines, I am enabled to furnish as perfect a plan of the work as can be obtained at this day. It will give a better idea of it, with its position in relation to Fort Monroe, than could be conveyed by any verbal description. Much, however, is left to conjecture, especially as regards the course of the flanks. Beyond their intersection with the ditch, all is veiled in obscurity. The front lines bear a remarkable coincidence, with those of Fort Monroe in their rear.

In connection with this subject, it may not be uninteresting to mention, that some 16 or 17 years ago, in removing theru bbish of the old walls, a signet ring was found, which is now in the possession of Col. De Russy, the commanding Engineer at this station. It is of iron, lined with silver; and I attach hereto an impression, in wax, of the Coat of Arms. I would describe it in the language of heraldry as follows:

"Azure—a Bear rampant Argent, holding in his paws a globe or heart, surmounted by a cross." Crest," an eye with wings conjoined."

It would be a matter not devoid of interest, to trace this venerable relic to the family whose proud armory it bears; but I

have not the means of doing so, and must leave it to your society, whose especial province it is, and who are so much better qualified than I am to perform the task.

R. A.

NOTE. We apprehend that our correspondent is a little mistaken in supposing that the fort, which he has described above, was the same that was authorized to be built by the Act of Assembly passed in 1629-30, which he quotes from Hening's Statutes at Large, vol. 1, p. 150; for in looking further on in the same volume, we find that another Act was passed in 1639, which provides, among other things, "Two lbs.," (to wit, of tobacco, per poll,) "to be raised next year, to build a new fort at Point Comfort."—(Hen. Stat., vol. 1, p. 226.) Is it not probable, then, that the old fort, built by the "worthy Capt. Samuel Mathews," was superseded by a new one? And is it not further probable that that new one was itself superseded by a subsequent one, built, as we may suppose, in the reign of one of the Georges, after whom it was named? It is true, our correspondent says, "the work was called Fort George," and no doubt it was; but when was it first called so? It is not called so in the Act which he cites, nor in any other that we have seen. quare de hoc.

So we say,

A BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICE OF

COMMODORE BARRON OF THE NAVY OF VIRGINIA.

We are indebted to a veteran officer of the U. S. N., now residing in Norfolk, for the following Biographical Notice of one who was a distinguished Captain in the little Navy of Virginia, during our revolutionary It is indeed only a sketch; but we are sure it will be read with interest, especially as it may serve to throw some new light upon a part of our history which has hitherto been almost entirely overlooked, or at least very imperfectly related.

war.

Commodore James Barron, of the revolutionary State Navy of Virginia, was born at Old Point Comfort, in October 1740. At the time of his birth, his father, Capt. Barron, was commander of the fort which was then at that place, called Fort George, and was living with his family in the Barracks of the garrison, as he continued to do until the memorable hurricane which occurred in 1749. At this period, young Barron was nine years old, and long afterwards used to speak of the hurricane which he dis