[Mr. Robert Macward went to England as the secretary, or amanuensis, of the famous Samuel Rutherford, when the latter was appointed one of the commissioners to the Westminster Assembly (Murray's Life of Rutherford, p. 233). When mentioning Macward's institution, as Professor of Humanity in the old college of St. Andrews, in April, 1650, Lamond says of him, that he was previously “servant to Mr. Sam Rutherford, m. of St. Andrews” (Diary, p. 16, Edin. 1830). Sir John Chiesley was, in the same sense, and at the same period, the servant of the celebrated Alexander Henderson, another of the commissioners (Kirkton's Hist. of the Ch. of Scot., note, p. 71). It is justly remarked by Dr. M'Crie, when speaking of Richard Bannatyne, who was also called the servant of Knox, “that the word servant, or servitor, was then used with greater latitude than it is now, and, in old writings, often signifies the person whom we call by the more honourable name of clerk, secretary, or man-of-business” (Life of Knox, p. 349. Sixth edition). Mr. Macward succeeded Mr. Andrew Gray as one of the ministers of Glasgow, in the year 1656, chiefly through the influence of Principal Gillespie (Baillie's Letters, vol. ii. pp. 406, 407. Cleland's Annals of Glasgow, vol. i. p. 128). A sentence of banishment was unjustly passed upon him for a sermon on Amos iii. 2, which he preached in the Tron Church, Glasgow, after the Restoration. As to what he said in that sermon regarding the conduct of the parliament, Baillie declares, that “all honest men did concur with him,” though he disapproves, at the same time, of Macward's “high language,” and blames him, because “he obstinately stood to all,” and thereby provoked his persecutors (Letters, pp. 453, 454). But it appears, from Wodrow (Hist. of the Sufferings of the Ch. of Scot., vol. i. p. 213, Glasg. 1829), that when Mr. Macward understood that what had given offence was the use he had made, in his sermon, of the words “protest” and “dissent,” he did not hesitate to explain he did not mean thereby a legal impugning of the acts, or authority of parliament, but “a mere ministerial testimony” against what he conceived to be sin. Macward retired to Holland.
After repeated applications from Charles the Second, the States General, on the 6th of February, 1677, ordered Mr. Macward, and other two Scottish exiles, to withdraw from the Seven Provinces of the Netherlands (Dr. M'Crie's Mem. of Veitch and Brysson, p. 367). That the States came to this determination with very great reluctance, will appear from the following passage in one of Sir William Temple's Letters: “I will only say that the business of the three Scotch ministers hath been the hardest piece of negotiation that I ever yet entered upon here, both from the particular interest of the towns and provinces of Holland, and the general esteem they have of Mackand [Macward] being a very quiet and pious man” (Vol. i. p. 291). It is creditable to the good feeling, though not certainly to the firmness of the States General that at the time they determined to require Macward and his two friends to leave the Seven Provinces, they voluntarily furnished them with a certificate bearing that each of them had lived among them “highly esteemed for his probity, submission to the laws, and integrity of manners” (Dr. M'Crie's Mem. of Veitch and Brysson, p. 368). He was afterwards permitted to return to Rotterdam, where he had been officiating as minister of the Scottish Church at the time he was ordered to remove out of the country. He died there in the month of December, 1681. Dr. Steven's “History of the Scottish Church, at Rotterdam”, p. 336.—Ed.]
[In his very interesting “History of the Scottish Church, Rotterdam,” Dr. Steven mentions (p. 72) that Mr. James Koelman was deprived of his charge at Sluys in Flanders, for refusing to observe the festival days and to comply with the formularies of the Dutch church. He appears to have been a very conscientious and pious man. Among the Wodrow MSS in the Library of the Faculty of Advocates Edinburgh (Vol. ix., Numb. 28) there is a copy of “A Resolution of the States of Zeeland anent the suspension of Thomas Pots and Bernardus Van Deinse, ministers of Vlissing, because of their suffering or causing Jacobus Coelman to preach, together with the Placinet (or proclamation) whereby the said Coelman is for ever banished out of the province of Zealand, Sept. 21, 1684.” Extract out of the Registers of the Noble and Mighty Lords, the States of Zeeland, Sept 21, 1684. It is set forth in this paper, that though Koelman had been suspended from his office by the States of the Land and Earldom of Zealand, in consequence of their “Resolution and penal discharge of the 21st of September, 1674, made by reason of his perverse opinions, and disobedience to his lawful high superiors,” he had notwithstanding “adventured and undertaken to go about private exercises within this province and also to preach twice publickly within the city Vliesing [Flushing] on Sabbath the 3d of this instant moneth, September, and so hath rendered himself guilty of the punishment contained in our forementioned Resolution, and penal discharge, bearing that he should be banished the province, so be he happened to hold any publick or private exercises there.”
Mr. Koelman, Mr. Macward and Mr. Brown of Wamphray, were the three clergymen who officiated at the ordination of Mr. Richard Cameron in the Scottish Church, Rotterdam, previous to his coming to Scotland in the beginning of the year 1680 (Biographia Presbyteriana, Vol. i., p. 197). It was Richard Cameron, when in the language of one of his friends, he was carrying Christ's standard over the mountains of Scotland, who repeated three times that simple and pathetic prayer, before he was killed at Airs-moss, Lord, spare the green, and take the ripe (Id. p. 203) From a letter written from Holland, 7th December, 1685, by Mr. Robert Hamilton of Preston, it may be seen how much Mr. Koelman interested himself in the affairs of the Scottish refugees (Faithful Contendings Displayed, pp. 203-205, 214, 215). There is prefixed to a Dutch translation of Binning's Common Principles of the Christian Religion, which was executed and published by Koelman at Amsterdam in 1678, a Memoir of the author. Koelman acknowledges he had derived all his information respecting Binning from a letter which he had received from Mr. Macward, through a mutual friend. This letter, or a copy of it, with some other of Macward's MSS., was in the possession of the publisher of the duodecimo volume of the sermons of the author, printed at Glasgow, 1760 (Preface, pp. iv, xxv). Koelman concludes his Memoir of Binning, which contains some excellent pious reflections, but almost no facts with which the English reader is not already acquainted, with a feeling allusion to his ejection from his charge at “Sluys in Vlaanderen.” After this painful separation from his flock, besides writing many useful original works, he seems to have employed his leisure in translating into his native language some of the most esteemed practical writings of foreign divines, such as Guthrie's Great Concern, Rutherford's Letters, &c. Dr. Steven's Hist. ut supra.—Ed.]
[Adverting to a sermon, which was preached by Mr. Matthew M'Kell, at a field meeting in the year 1669, Wodrow says, that he was “a true Nathanael, and a very plain dealer” (Hist. of the Suf. of Ch. of Scot., vol. ii. p. 127). After having been, on different occasions brought before the Privy council, and imprisoned, he was, on the 8th of January, 1674, upon his refusing to engage not to preach, ordered to confine himself to the parish of Carluke, and security was required from him that he would appear before the Council at their summons (Id. vol. i. pp. 371, 372, vol. ii. p. 248. See also History of Indulgence, p. 36). He died at Edinburgh, in March 1681 (Laws Memorialis, p. 183).
Wodrow does not speak with much confidence, as to the degree of propinquity which existed betwixt Mr. Matthew M'Kail minister of Bothwell and Mr. Hugh M'Kail, the young licentiate who was executed at Edinburgh, 22d Dec, 1666, for being concerned in the insurrection at Pentland. But Colonel Wallace, who commanded the insurgents on that unfortunate occasion, styles “Mr. Hugh M'Kell son of Mr. Matthew M'Kell minister of Bothwell” (Wallace's Narrative of the Rising at Pentland, in Dr M'Crie's Memoirs of Veitch and Brysson, p. 430). The unhappy father was allowed to see his son in prison, after his sentence. There is an affecting account in Naphtali (pp. 339, 345) of this mournful interview, and of another which took place on the morning of the execution. The address of young M'Kail on the scaffold concluded with these sublime expressions—“Farewell, father and mother, friends and relations. Farewell the world, and all delights. Farewell meat and drink. Farewell sun, moon and stars. Welcome God and Father! Welcome sweet Lord Jesus the Mediator of the new covenant! Welcome blessed Spirit of grace, and God of all consolation! Welcome glory! Welcome eternal life! Welcome death!” (Id. p. 348 Edin. 1761). We are told by Kirkton that “when Mr. M'Kail died, there was such a lamentation as was never known in Scotland before, not one dry cheek upon all the street or in all the numberless windows in the market place” (Hist. of Ch. of Scot. p. 249). It was discovered afterwards, that Burnet, archbishop of Glasgow, had in his possession at the time, a letter from the king, forbidding any more blood to be shed. But to the disgrace of his sacred profession, and of his feelings as a man, “Burnet let the execution go on, before he produced his letter, pretending there was no council day between”—Burnet's Hist. of his own Times, vol. ii. p. 435 Oxford, 1833.—Ed.]
[All accounts agree in stating that Mr. Hugh M'Kail, minister in Edinburgh, was uncle to the preacher of the same name who was executed. The minister of Bothwell, therefore, instead of being the father, must have been the brother of the minister in Edinburgh. In the years 1636, and 1637, when Mr. Samuel Rutherford was in Aberdeen, according to his own description of himself, “a poor Joseph, and prisoner,” with whom his “mother's children were angry,” he wrote several letters to Mr. Hugh M'Kail, in answer to others which he received from him (Rutherford's Letters, pp. 41, 247, 272, 292 Sixth edition Edin., 1738). The name of Mr. Hugh M'Kail is included in the list of ministers who, on the 19th of August 1643, were by the General Assembly appointed Commissioners for the Visitation of the University of Glasgow (Evidence of Royal Commissioners for Visiting the Universities of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 261, London, 1837). Mr. Hugh M'Kail, minister at Irvine, was likewise one of the ministers commissioned by the Assembly, in 1644, to visit the church in Ulster (Dr. Reid's History of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, vol. ii. p. 57). As a further proof of the estimation in which he was held by his brethren, when it was proposed by the Assembly, in 1648, to recommend to the general session of Edinburgh six ministers, that they might choose four from these to fill their vacant churches, Mr. Hugh M'Kail was selected to be one of the number (Baillie's Letters, vol. ii. p. 303). He was a Resolutioner (Id. p. 387). He died in 1660 (Lamont's Diary, p. 121) The editor of Kirkton's History of the Church of Scotland for the purpose of bringing ridicule upon the presbyterian clergy of that day, quotes a passage from the MS. sermons of Mr. Hugh M'Kail. We are much mistaken, however, if on reading that passage and after making some allowance for an antiquated style, and a certain degree of quaintness, one of the characteristics of the age,—the impression produced upon the mind of any candid person, who admires strong good sense, though presented in a homely dress, is not in a very high degree favourable to the character and talents of the author (See Kirkton's History, pp. 227, 228). In the preface to Stevenson's History of the Church and State of Scotland, reference is made to a manuscript, having this title, “A true relation of the Prelates their practice for introducing the Service book, &c, upon the Church of Scotland, and the Subjects, their lawful proceedings in opposing the same.” This manuscript, Mr. Stevenson observes, was believed to have belonged to “one of the Mr. Mackails, once famous ministers in this church”. Some information respecting it will be found in the Appendix (pp. 191, 192) to Lord Rothess' Relation of Proceedings concerning the Affairs of the Kirk of Scotland, printed in Edinburgh, 1830. for the Bannatyne Club.—Ed.]
[About the same period Mr. Alexander Jamieson, who was afterwards minister of Govan, obtained the appointment of Regent in the University of St. Andrews, after engaging in a public disputation. The description of what took place on that occasion given by Mr. John Lamont of Newton, is not devoid of interest as a picture of the times—1649 Apr. 10, 11—“Ther were three younge men that did disputte for the vacant regents place in St. Leonard's Colledge, Mr. David Nauee, (formerlie possessing the same, bot now deposed, as is spoken before), viz., Mr. Alex Jamesone, ane Edenbroughe man, having for his subject, Syllogismus, Mr. William Diledaffe, a Cuper man, his subject, Liberum Arbitrium, and Mr. James Weymes, a St. Androus man, he having De Anima for his subject. All the tyme they had ther speeches, ther heads werre couered, bot when they came to the disputte, they were vncouered. Ther werre three of the five ministers forsaide present at the disputs, viz., Mr. Alexander Moncriefe, Mr. Walt. Greige, and Mr. Ja. Sharpe [afterwards archbishop of St. Andrews], wha had decisive voices in the electione of a Regent (thir werre the first ministers that ever had voice in the electione of a measter to ane of the colledges there, the custome formerlie, and of olde, was, that every colledge had libertie to chose thir owne measters) For Mr. Ja. Weymes he was the warst of the three, for in the disputs, he bracke Priscian's head verry often, for Mr. Alex. James and Mr. Wil. Diled they werre judged pares by the wholle meitting, so that after longe debeatte, they werre forcet to cast lotts, and the lott fell upon Mr. Alex Jamesone wha did succeide to the forsaide vacant regents place. Mr. Wil. Diled got a promise (bot with difficultie) of the next vacant place. Mr. Ro. Noue, professor of Humanitie in the said colledge, had no voice in the forsaide electione because, he was not present at all the meittings of the disputs.”—(Lamont's Diary, p. 4, Edin. 1830)
The last instance of a public competition for a chair in the University of Glasgow, occurred towards the close of the seventeenth century soon after the Revolution. It is remarkable enough that in this case also, the result was ultimately determined by lot. “A programme was immediately published, and on the day appointed no less than nine candidates appeared to enter the lists in a comparative trial. All of them acquitted themselves so well during the whole course of a long trial that the electors were at a loss whom to choose. Setting aside some of the nine who were thought less deserving, they could not find a ground of preference among the rest. It was therefore resolved, after prayer to God, to commit the choice to lot. The lot fell upon Mr. John Law, and a present of five pounds stirling was given to each of the other candidates. One of the competitors was Mr. William Jamieson, a blind man known to the learned world by his writings. He was after some years chosen to give public lectures in the college upon Ecclesiastical History for which he had a pension from the Crown till his death.”—MS. History of the University of Glasgow, written by Dr. Thomas Reid, formerly Professor of Moral Philosophy.—Ed.]
[Long after the publication of the Novum Organum of Lord Bacon and even after the successful application of his principles by Sir Isaac Newton and Locke, the logic and metaphysics of Aristotle continued to occupy the chief place, in the course of instruction, in the most celebrated universities of Europe. The first great reform, in the mode of teaching philosophy, introduced into the college of Glasgow, was effected through a royal visitation, which took place in 1727. “The improvements in this university,” says Professor Jardine, arising from the regulations introduced by the royal visitation, were greatly promoted by the appointment, which took place shortly afterwards of more than one professor of singular zeal and ability. The first of these was Dr. Francis Hutcheson. This celebrated philosopher, whose mind was stored with the rarest gifts of learning, illustrated, with a copious and splendid eloquence, the amiable system of morality which is still associated with his name, producing thus the happiest effects not only on his own students but also on his colleagues, and infusing at once a more liberal spirit, and a greater degree of industry, into all the departments of teaching. Great obstacles, however, still remained. The professor of the first philosophy class according to the practice of the times continued to deliver his lectures in the Latin language, a method of instruction which, although it must long have proved a great impediment to the ready communication of knowledge on the part of the teacher, and to the reception of it on the part of the pupil, was not discontinued in this college, till upon the following occasion.