Page:A biographical dictionary of eminent Scotsmen, vol 5.djvu/294

354 however he might be inclined to be conciliatory about epithets, Lauder resisted with firmness the strong attempt made by James and his commissioner, the earl of Moray, towards the conclusion of the parliament, finally to abolish the penalties against Roman catholics. In his manuscripts are preserved seventeen closely written pages of matter on this subject, entitled "A Discourse in defence, whereof part was spoken in the parliament, of the Penal Laws against Popery, and why the Toleration Act should not pass; and the rest was intended, but was prevented by the sudden rising of the parliament." Frequent application, often in the most contemptible of causes, has made the arguments contained in this able document too hackneyed to please a modern taste; an impartial posterity, however, will reflect, that though liberal feeling has often been disgusted by a similar discussion of a question, which to this day bears the same name, the supporters of the penal laws against Roman catholics in the reign of James the Seventh, were not striking against freedom of opinion; that they were a party which had just halted from a battle for their own privileges and liberties, and once more beheld them sternly menaced; that they did not wish to dictate to the consciences of an oppressed body of men, but were boldy preserving the purity of their own, by using the only means in their power to prevent the resuscitation of a church which sat in judgment over the mind, and was armed with a sword to compel obedience to its dictates. "It were," says Lauder, "a strange excess and transport of Christian lenity and moderation, to abolish our laws against papists, who, by the principles and practice of their church, may show no favour to us; but will turn the weapons we arm them with to the total subversion of our religion:" words which had a meaning when a bigoted papal monarch sat on the throne, and the horrors of a high commission were in too fresh recollection; but which have none when used towards a poor and powerless body, desiring to enjoy their own religion in peace.

We must not omit to mention, that at the trial of the duke of Monmouth in 1686, Sir John Lauder and other two counsel were employed to protest for the interest of the duchess, who was absolute proprietrix of the estate enjoyed by her husband. The criminal court would not condescend to receive a protest in a matter purely civil; but did condescend to forfeit the property of the duchess for the crime of her husband. It was afterwards, however, given back by the king.

We pause in the history of his political career, to record a few domestic events which characterized the life of Sir John Lauder. He had been married on the 21st January, 1669, to Janet Ramsay, daughter of Sir Andrew Ramsay, lord Abbotshall, whose father was the celebrated Andrew Ramsay, minister of the Grey-friars' church. This lady, after bearing him eleven children, died in 1686. Her husband has thus affectionately noted the event, "27 February, 1686, at night happened mors charissima meæ conjugis mihi amarissima et luctuosissima; so there is little to the 10th of March, I not having come abroad till then." On the margin is written nota non obliviscenda. In the curious familiar memorials which he has left behind him, we find frequent instances of that warm domestic feeling which is often the private ornament of men illustrious for their public and political intrepidity. To any disaster in his numerous family—for he had seven children by a second wife—we sometimes meet such simple allusions as the following, buried among the legal notanda, or the political events of that feverish period: "17 Decembris, 1695, I entered on the bills; and my dear child Robert dying this day, the observes are the fewer, in respect of my absence for two days, and my other affairs, which diverted my constant attention that week." Again, "21 July, 1696, Tuesday: my dear son William