United States or Cabo Verde ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
This account was dictated to me by Mr Patrick Simson, Mr Gillespie’s cousin, who was with him to his last sickness, and at his death, and took minutes at the time of these his expressions. I read it over, after I had written it, to him. He corrected some words, and said to me, “This is all I mind about his expressions toward his close.
And as a tolerably full account of the whole controversy between Coleman and Gillespie will be found in the Memoir of Gillespie’s Life, we refrain from occupying space with any additional remarks here. “All eyes are upon government, they look upon it as the only help. If anywhere, here let wisdom be used.
Irritated by the castigation he had received, Coleman published a bitter reply, to which he gave the somewhat unintelligible title of “Male Dicis Maledicis,”—intending, probably, to insinuate that Gillespie’s answer was of a railing character.
The differences, indeed, continued; but they assumed the form of written controversy, the essence of which we have in the volume entitled, “The Grand Debate.” It is probable, therefore, that the lost volumes of Gillespie’s manuscript contained chiefly his own remarks on the writings of the Independents, and, not unlikely, the outlines of the answers returned by the Assembly.
But while such were Gillespie’s labours in the field of controversy, the value of which could not be easily over-estimated, his memory would be grievously wronged were we to regard him only as a controversialist.
The effect of Gillespie’s speech was so great, as not only to convince the Assembly, but also to astonish and confound Seldon himself, who is reported to have exclaimed in a tone of bitter mortification, “That young man, by this single speech, has swept away the learning and labour of ten years of my life!” Those who were clustered together in the passage near the door, remembering Gillespie’s expression when he was attempting to enter, said one to another, “It was well that we admitted the pinning, otherwise the building would have fallen.” Even his Scottish brethren, although well acquainted with his great abilities, were surprised with his masterly analysis of Selden’s argument, and looked into his note-book, expecting there to find the outline of the summary which he had given.
Of these manuscript volumes there are two copies in the Wodrow MSS., Advocates’ Library, but neither of them appears to be Gillespie’s own hand-writing; the quarto certainly is not, and the octavo seems to be an accurate copy of two of the original volumes.
It should be added, that on consulting the records of that Assembly’s proceedings, we do indeed find Argyle’s grave admonition not to interfere with the authority due to the King in his own province, and the Moderator’s answer; but nothing to lead us to think that it had any reference to Gillespie’s sermon.
But, if that book be truly of his making, I admire the man, though I mislike much of his matter; yea, I think he may prove amongst the best wits of this isle.” So far as argument was concerned, the controversy was ended by Gillespie’s work, as no answer was ever attempted by the prelates. But the contest, which began as one of power against principle, ere long became one of power against power.
Supposing this to be the case, it would doubtless have been very interesting to have had Gillespie’s remarks and arguments, but they could not have given much information which we do not at present possess. A few brief notices respecting the papers now first published may both be interesting, and may conduce to rendering them intelligible to the general reader.
Word Of The Day