THE GREAT AYLESBURY CASE 69 



Robert Mead, attorney-at-law, is guilty of high 

 contempt of the jurisdiction and privileges of the 

 House by prosecuting these actions against the 

 Returning Officers, and that Robert Mead should 

 be committed to the custody of the Sergeant-at- 

 Arms.' On November 8 the judges refused a writ 

 of Habeas Corpus, and the prisoners were conse- 

 quently remanded to Newgate. In February 1704 

 John Patey and John Oviatt, two of the Aylesbury 

 men committed to Newgate, petitioned for a Writ of 

 Error to bring their case before her Majesty. 

 The House of Commons petitioned the Queen 

 (Anne) not to grant their petition. On Febru- 

 ary 26, the House of Commons ordered that James 

 Montague, Esq., and five other attorneys be taken 

 into custody for aiding and abetting Patey and 

 others in their action against the Returning Officers 

 at Aylesbury ; and on the 27th the House of 

 Lords gave its protection to all the parties con- 

 cerned, as counsel, solicitors, &c., to the Aylesbury 

 men, and prohibited anyone from arresting, im- 

 prisoning, or in any way detaining James Montague 

 and others. On the 28th her Majesty expressed 

 her great regret to the House of Commons, and 

 was much troubled to find that they were against 

 her granting a Writ of Error, as against their 

 privileges, of which her Majesty would always be as 

 tender as her own prerogative, and that the House 

 might depend that she would do nothing to give 

 them just cause of complaint ; but that this matter 

 relating to the course of judicial procedure, being 



