Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 10.djvu/19

 tone of this little book, which was written, as he tells us in the preface, for the use of a son he sent to the East Indies, he gave great offence to his more orthodox professional brethren, who regarded him, and not unreasonably, as a busy, adventurous empiric. Accordingly we find that in March 1688 the College of Physicians had, at the information of Dr. Charleton, taken action against him for the illegal and evil practice of medicine, and fined him 10l. on pain of being committed to Newgate. He continued, however, to enjoy an extensive business at court, while he was always selected by James II to attend his queen in her confinements. At the birth of the Prince James Edward, afterwards known as the Old Pretender, on 10 June 1688, Chamberlen came too late to be present. His very curious letter to the Electress Sophia of Hanover on the circumstances, dated (but in a different handwriting) from the Hague on 4 Oct. 1713, and now preserved in the Birch MS. 4107, f. 150, has always been cited as most important evidence against the popular theory of the prince being a supposititious child (, Memoirs of Gt. Brit. and Ireland, 1773, ii. 311–13). Although valued for his professional skill, there is little doubt that Chamberlen's politics found small favour in the eyes of royalty; indeed, in the letter referred to Chamberlen speaks of his 'being a noted whig, and signally oppressed by King James.' Cooke, too (History of Party, i. 453–4), commenting on the birth of the Old Pretender, alludes to Chamberlen as 'a known whig who had suffered for his political principles.' Thus it will be seen why it was thought necessary in June 1686 to issue 'A Pardon to Hugh Chamberlain of all Treasons, misprisons of Treason, Insurrection, Rebellions, & other Crimes and Offenses by him com̃itted before the first day of June instant, and of all Indictments, Convicc̃ons, Paines and fforfeitures by reason thereof: With such Clauses and non obstantes as are usuall in Pardons of like nature' (Docquet Books, Signet, Record Office).

Chamberlen's last medical effort was published in 1694, with the title 'A few Queries relating to the Practice of Physick, with remarks upon some of them, modestly proposed to the serious consideration of Mankind, in order to their information how their lives and healths (which are so necessary, and therefore ought to he so dear to them) may be better preserved,' 8vo, London, 1694. It contains little more than what he had already adduced in his 'Manuale Medicum,' but at the end he published 'A Proposal for the better securing, of health, intended in the year 1689 and still ready to be humbly offered to the Consideration of the Honourable Houses of Parliament.' This desirable object, he suggests, might be attained by a small yearly sum to be assessed upon each house, in order that every family might be served 'much better and cheaper than at present, with Visits, Advice, Medicine, and Surgery.' He suggests that the existing laws which provided against the sale of bad food and adulterated drinks should be revised and strictly enforced, besides periodical cleansings of the streets and houses.

For several years, as he himself tells us, his famous land bank project had occupied much of his attention, out it was not until November 1690 that he issued from his house in Essex Street the first draft of his scheme, with the title, 'Dr. Hugh Chamberlen's Proposal to make England Rich and Happy.' The plan was frequently modified, but briefly stated, the bank was to advance money on the security of landed property by issuing large quantities of notes on the fallacy that a lease of land for a term of years might be worth many times the fee simple. The next nine years found Chamberlen living in an atmosphere of the keenest excitement. A glance at the bibliography of the subject, some forty-five pamphlets in number, which the assiduity of his biographer. Dr. Aveling, has gathered together for the first time, will show how readily Chamberlen met the attacks of foes and rivals alike. From the same source we find that he set apart three evenings in the week to explain his project to all who cared to learn and to answer objections, while to members of parliament he paid especial court, in the hope of winning their support. In December 1693 Chamberlen laid his plan before the commons, and petitioned to be heard. As the result a committee was appointed which reported that the plan was 'practicable and would tend to the benefit of the nation.' By this time, however, the absurdity of the scheme had become apparent, and the report lay unnoticed on the table. Two years later the project was revived in a greatly modified form, much to Chamberlen's vexation; the bill (7 & 8 Will. III, cap. 31) passed both houses and received the royal assent on 27 April 1696, but immediately afterwards the parliament was prorogued (, Hist. of Eng. iv. ch. xxi.; Commons' Journals, xi. 22, 80).

The collapse of the land bank scheme was received with a storm of derision, and its unfortunate projector was forced eventually to fly the country. Although Luttrell (Relation of State Affairs, 1857, iv. 496) and the author of a broadside published on the occasion ('Hue and Cry after a Man-Midwife,