DISPUTES BETWEEN THE TWO HOUSES.

The lords and commons, animated by such opposite principles, seized every opportunity of thwarting each other. An action having been brought by one Matthew Ashby against William White and the other constables of Aylesbury, for having denied him the privilege of voting in the last election, the cause was tried at the assizes, and the constables were cast with damages. But an order was given in the queen’s bench to quash all the proceedings, since no action had ever been brought on that account. The cause being moved by writ of error into the house of lords, was argued with great warmth; at length it was carried by a great majority, that the order of the queen’s bench should be set aside, and judgment pronounced according to the verdict given at the assizes. The commons considered these proceedings as encroaching on their privileges. They passed five different resolutions, importing, That the commons of England, in parliament assembled, had the sole right to examine and determine all matters relating to the right of election of their own members; that the practice of determining the qualifications of electors in any court of law would expose all mayors, bailiffs, and returning officers, to a multiplicity of vexatious suits and insupportable expenses, and subject them to different and independent jurisdictions, as well as to inconsistent determinations in the same case, without relief; that Matthew Ashby was guilty of a breach of privilege, as were all attorneys, solicitors, counsellors, and sergeants-at-law, soliciting, prosecuting, or pleading, in any case of the same nature. These resolutions, signed by the clerk, were fixed upon the gate of Westminster-hall. On the other hand, the lords appointed a committee to draw up a state of the case; and, upon their report, resolved, That every person being wilfully hindered to exercise his right of voting, might maintain an action in the queen’s courts against the officer by whom his vote should be refused, to assert his right, and recover damage for the injury; that an assertion to the contrary was destructive of the property of the subjects, against the freedom of elections, and manifestly tended to the encouragement of partiality and corruption; that the declaring of Matthew Ashby guilty of a breach of privilege of the house of commons, was an unprecedented attempt upon the judicature of parliament, and an attempt to subject the law of England to the votes of the house of commons. Copies of the case, and these resolutions, were sent by the lord-keeper to all the sheriffs of England, to be circulated through all the boroughs of their respective counties.