Page:A biographical dictionary of eminent Scotsmen, vol 2.djvu/167

Rh

CALDERWOOD,, an eminent divine and ecclesiastical historian. The year of his birth, the place of his education, and the character of the family from which he was descended, are all alike unknown. The earliest ascertained fact of his life is his settlement, in 1604, as minister of Crailing, in Roxburghshire. Being a zealous supporter of the principles of presbytery, he set himself with all his might to oppose the designs of the court, which aimed at the introduction of a moderate episcopacy. In 1608, when the Bishop of Glasgow paid an official visit to the synod of Merse and Teviotdale, Mr Calderwood gave in a paper declining his jurisdiction. For this act of contumacy, he was confined for several years to his parish, so as to prevent his taking any share in the public business of the church. In the summer of 1617, king James paid a visit to Scotland, for the purpose of urging forward his episcopal innovations. On this occasion, while the parliament was considering how to intrust powers of ecclesiastical supremacy to the king, the clergy were convened to deliberate in a collusive manner, so that every thing might appear to be done with the consent and approbation of the church. This assemblage was attended by the bishops, who affected to consider it an imitation of the convocations of the English church. Calderwood, being now permitted to move about, though still forbidden to attend synods or presbyteries, appeared at this meeting, which he did not scruple to proclaim as in no respect a convocation, but simply a free assembly of the clergy. Finding himself opposed by some friends of the bishops, Mr Calderwood took leave of them in a short but pithy speech, allusive to the sly attempts of the king to gain the clergy, by heightening their stipends: "It was absurd," he said, " to see men sitting in silks and satins, crying poverty in the kirk, while purity was departing." He assisted, however, at another meeting of the clergy, where it was resolved to deliver a protest to parliament, against a particular article, or bill, by which the power of framing new laws for the church was to be intrusted to an ecclesiastical council appointed by the king. This protest was signed by Mr Archibald Simpson, as representing all the rest, who, for his justification, furnished him with a roll containing their own signatures. One copy of the document was intrusted to a clergyman of the name of Hewat, who, having a seat in parliament, undertook to present it. Another remained with Mr Simpson, in case of accident. Mr Hewat's copy having been torn in a dispute with Archbishop Spottiswoode, Mr Simpson presented his, and was soon after called before the tyrannical court of High Commission, as a stirrer up of sedition. Being pressed to give up the roll containing the names of his abettors, he acknowledged it was now in the hands of Mr David Calderwood, who was then cited to exhibit the said roll, and, at the same time, to answer for his seditious and mutinous behaviour. The Commission court sat at St Andrews, and the king having come there himself, had the curiosity to examine Mr Calderwood in person. Some of the persons present came up to the peccant divine, and, in a friendly manner, counselled him to "come in the king's will," that his majesty might pardon him. But Mr Calderwood entertained too strong a sense of the propriety and importance of what he had been doing, to yield up the point in this manner. "That which was done," he said, "was done with deliberation." In the conversation which ensued betwixt the Icing and him, the reader will be surprised to find many of the most interesting points of modern liberty, asserted with a firmness and dignity worthy of an ancient Roman.

King. What moved you to protect?