Though the climate of Callao is good, having the pure breeze from the Pacific, and a temperature rarely exceeding 77° or falling below 65° Fahr., yet, in the absence of all hygiene, diseases, such as fevers and smallpox, are very prevalent, and the rate of mortality is high. The population, in default of recent exact enumeration, may be taken at from 15,000 to 18,000; the census of 1866, the latest, gave 14,800, a decrease of upwards of 2000 in seven years, and the number was further reduced by the havoc made by yellow fever in 1868. The traffic and business, and with these probably the population, of the port are, however, increasing.

CALLCOTT, John Wall (1766—1821), brother of the preceding, was born at Kensington in 1766, and was the son of a builder. At the age of seven he was sent to a neighbouring day school, where he continued for five years, studying chiefly Latin and Greek. During this time he frequently went to Kensington church, in the repairs of which his father was employed, and the impression he received on hearing the organ of that church seems to have roused his love for music. The organist at that time was Henry Whitney, from whom Callcott received his first musical instruction. He did not, however, choose music as a profession, being desirous to become a surgeon, only when on witnessing a surgical operation he found his nervous system seriously affected by the sight, he determined to devote himself to music. His intimacy with Dr Arnold and other leading musicians of the day procured him access to artistic circles; and his successful competition for the prize offered by a musical society called the “Catch Club” soon spread his reputation as composer of glees, catches, canons, and other pieces of concerted vocal music. On these his reputation as a creative musician is mainly founded. In them he displays considerable skill and talent, and some of his glees retain their popularity at the present day. They are well adapted to the voice, and their melodies are pleasing and not without feeling. As an instrumental composer Callcott never succeeded, not even after he had taken lessons from Haydn. But of far greater importance than his compositions are his theoretical writings, and it is chiefly for the sake of the latter that he is noteworthy beyond other English composers of equal merit. His Musical Grammar, published in 1806 (3d edition, 1817), was long considered as the standard work of musical instruction in this country, and has not been superseded up to the present day by any other book produced by an English musician. It is a scholarly and lucid treatment of the rudiments of the art, but at present, of course, antiquated to a great extent, and, indeed, all but useless to the student of modern music. Callcott was a much esteemed teacher of music for many years. He also held the position of organist at various churches. In 1800 he took his degree of Mus. D. at Oxford, and in 1805 he succeeded Dr Crotch as musical lecturer at the Royal Institution. Towards the end of his life his artistic career was frequently interrupted by ill-health. He died, after much suffering, in 1821. A posthumous collection of his most favourite vocal pieces was published with a memoir of his life by his son-in-law, Mr W. Horsley, himself a composer of note. Numerous other works remain in manuscript.

CALLCOTT, Mrs Maria Graham (1786-1844), daughter of Admiral Dundas, became the wife of Sir Augustus Callcott in 1827. With her first husband, Capt. Graham, R.N., she travelled in India, South Africa, and South America, "where she acted for some time as teacher of Donna Maria, who became queen of Portugal in 1826; and in the company of her second husband she spent much time in the south of Europe. She published accounts of her visits to India (1812), and to the environs of Rome (1820); Memoirs of Poussin (1820); a History of France ; a History of Spain (1828); Essays toward a History of Painting (1836); Little Arthur’s History of England (1836); and the Scripture Herbal (1842).

CALLIMACHUS, an architect and statuary, the inventor of the Corinthian column, was probably a native of Corinth. He is said to have derived the idea of the Corinthian capital from observing an acanthus plant surrounding a tile-covered basket which had been placed over a tomb. His era is uncertain; but as the Corinthian column was used in 396 B,c., by Scopas, the architect of the temple of Athena Aiea at Tegea, he must have lived before that time. Though Callimachus worked admirably in marble he is said to have spoiled his original conceptions by excessive elaboration, which rendered his style artificial. (Plin., N^. II. , xxxiv. 8, s. 19.)

To this it is replied, that this whole statement respecting a believer’s calling is without any support from the Scriptures, and is either a misunderstanding, or a misapplication of their sense. “To call” signifies to invite to the blessings of the Gospel, to offer salvation through Christ, either by God himself, or, under his appointment, by his servants; and in the parable of the marriage of the king’s son, Matt. xxii, 1–14, which appears to have given rise, in many instances, to the use of this term in the Epistles, we have three descriptions of “called” or invited persons. First, the disobedient, who would not come in at the call, but made light of it. Second, the class of persons represented by the man who, when the king came in to see his guests, had not on the wedding garment; and with respect to whom our Lord makes the general remark, “For many are called, but few are chosen;” so that the persons thus represented by this individual culprit were not only “called,” but actually came into the company. Third, the approved guests; those who were both called and chosen. As far as the simple calling or invitation is concerned, all these three classes stood upon equal ground--all were invited; and it depended upon their choice and conduct whether they embraced the invitation, and were admitted as guests. We have nothing here to countenance the notion of what is termed “effectual calling.” This implies an irresistible influence exerted upon all the approved guests, but withheld from the disobedient, who could not, therefore, be otherwise than disobedient; or at most could only come in without that wedding garment, which it was never put into their power to take out of the king’s wardrobe; and the want of which would necessarily exclude them, if not from the church on earth, yet from the church in heaven. The doctrine of Christ’s parables is in entire contradiction to this notion of irresistible influence; for they who refused, and they who complied but partially with the calling, are represented, not merely as being left without the benefit of the feast, but as incurring additional guilt and condemnation for refusing the invitation. It is to this offer of salvation by the Gospel, this invitation to spiritual and eternal benefits, that St. Peter appears to refer, when he says, “For the PROMISE is unto you and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall CALL,” Acts ii, 39; a passage which declares “the promise” to be as extensive as the “calling;” in other words, as the offer or invitation. To this also St. Paul refers, Rom. i, 5, 6: “By whom we have received grace and Apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name;” that is, to publish his Gospel, in order to bring all nations to the obedience of faith; “among whom are ye also the CALLED of Jesus Christ;” you at Rome have heard the Gospel, and have been invited to salvation in consequence of this design. This promulgation of the Gospel, by the personal ministry of the Apostle, under the name of _calling_, is also referred to in Gal. i, 6: “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that _called you_ into the grace of Christ,” obviously meaning, that it was he himself who had called them, by his preaching, to embrace the grace of Christ. So also in chap. v, 13: “For, brethren, ye have been _called_ unto liberty.” Again: 1 Thess. ii, 12: “That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath CALLED you,” invited you, “to his kingdom and glory.”

In our Lord’s parable it will also be observed, that the persons called are not invited as separate individuals to partake of solitary blessings; but they are called to “a feast,” into a company or society, before whom the banquet is spread. The full revelation of the transfer of the visible church of Christ from Jews by birth, to believers of all nations, was not, however, then made. When this branch of the evangelic system was fully revealed to the Apostles, and taught by them to others, that part of the meaning of our Lord’s parable which was not at first developed was more particularly discovered to his inspired followers. The calling of guests to the evangelical feast, we then more fully learn, was not the mere calling of men to partake of spiritual benefits; but calling them also to form a spiritual society composed of Jews and Gentiles, the believing men of all nations; to have a common fellowship in these blessings, and to be formed into this fellowship for the purpose of increasing their number, and diffusing the benefits of salvation among the people or nation to which they respectively belonged. The invitation, “the calling,” of the first preachers was to all who heard them in Rome, in Ephesus, in Corinth, and other places; and those who embraced it, and joined themselves to the church by faith, baptism, and continued public profession, were named, especially and eminently, “the called,” because of their obedience to the invitation. They not only put in their claim to the blessings of Christianity individually, but became members of the new church, that spiritual society of believers which God now visibly owned as his people. As they were thus called into a common fellowship by the Gospel, this is sometimes termed their “vocation;” as the object of this church state was to promote “holiness,” it is termed a “holy vocation;” as sanctity was required of the members, they are said to have been “called to be saints;” as the final result was, through the mercy of God, to be eternal life, we hear of “the hope of their calling,” and of their being “called to his eternal glory by Christ Jesus.”

These views will abundantly explain the various passages in which the term _calling_ occurs in the Epistles: “Even us whom he hath _called_, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles,” Rom. ix, 24; that is, whom he hath made members of his church through faith. “But unto them which are _called_, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God;” the wisdom and efficacy of the Gospel being, of course, acknowledged in their very profession of Christ, in opposition to those to whom the preaching of “Christ crucified” was “a stumbling block,” and “foolishness,” 1 Cor. i, 24. “Is any man _called_,” (brought to acknowledge Christ, and to become a member of his church,) “being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any _called_ in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised,” 1 Cor. vii, 18. “That ye walk worthy of the _vocation_, wherewith ye are called. There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are _called_ in one hope of your calling,” Eph. iv, 1, 4. “That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath _called_ you to his kingdom and glory,” 1 Thess. ii, 12. “Through sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth, whereunto he _called_ you by our Gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ,” 2 Thess. ii, 13, 14. “Who hath saved us and _called_ us with a holy calling; not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began; but is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ,” 2 Tim. i, 9, 10. On this passage we may remark, that the “calling,” and the “purpose” mentioned in it, must of necessity be interpreted to refer to the establishment of the church on the principle of faith, so that it might include men of all nations; and not, as formerly, be restricted to natural descent. For _personal election_, and a purpose of _effectual personal calling_, could not have been hidden till manifested by the “appearing of Christ;” since every instance of true conversion to God in any age prior to the appearing of Christ, would be as much a manifestation of eternal election, and an instance of personal effectual calling, according to the Calvinistic scheme, as it was after the appearance of Christ. The Apostle is speaking of a purpose of God, which was kept _secret_ till revealed by the Christian system; and, from various other parallel passages, we learn that this secret, this “mystery,” as he often calls it, was the union of the Jews and Gentiles in “one body,” or church, by faith.

In none of these passages is the doctrine of the exclusive calling of a set number of men contained; and the synod of Dort, as though they felt this, only attempt to _infer_ the doctrine from a text already quoted; but which we will now more fully notice: “Whom he did predestinate, them he also _called_; and whom he _called_, them he also justified; and whom he justified, them he also glorified,” Rom. viii, 30. This is the text on which the Calvinists chiefly rest their doctrine of effectual calling; and tracing it, as they say, through its steps and links, they conclude, that a set and determinate number of persons having been predestinated unto salvation, this set number only are _called effectually_, then justified, and finally glorified. But this passage was evidently nothing to the purpose, unless it had spoken of a set and determinate number of men as predestinated and called, independent of any consideration of their faith and obedience; which number as being determinate, would, by consequence exclude the rest. The context declares that those who are foreknown, and predestinated to eternal glory, are true believers, those who “love God,” as stated in a subsequent verse; for of such only the Apostle speaks; and when he adds, “Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he also called; and whom he called, them he also justified; and whom he justified, them he also glorified;” he shows in particular how the divine purpose to glorify believers is carried into effect, through all its stages. The great instrument of bringing men to “love God” is the Gospel; they are, therefore, _called_, invited by it, to this state and benefit; the calling being obeyed, they are _justified_; and being justified, and continuing in that state of grace, they are _glorified_. Nothing, however, is here said to favour the conclusion, that many others who were _called_ by the Gospel, but refused, might not have been justified and glorified as well as they; nothing to distinguish this calling into common and effectual: and the very guilt which those are every where represented as contracting who despised the Gospel calling, shows that they reject a grace which is sufficient, and sincerely intended, to save them.