“Yesterday, the forty-fifth day of the year, forty-five gentlemen, real enemies to internal taxation, by, or in obedience to external authority, and cordial friends to Capt. McDougall, and the glorious cause of American liberty, went in decent procession to the New Gaol; and dined with him on forty-five pounds of beef, cut from a bullock of forty-five months old, and with a number of other friends who joined them in the afternoon, drank a variety of toasts, expressive not only of the most undissembled loyalty, but of the warmest attachment to Liberty, its renowned advocates in Great Britain and America, and the freedom of the press. Before the evening the whole company, who conducted themselves with great decency, separated in the most cordial manner, but not without the firmest resolution to continue united in the glorious cause.” In April he was indicted by the Grand Jury for libel, and being brought to the bar pleaded not guilty and was admitted to bail. While matters were in this condition the Assembly again took the matter up. On Dec. 13, 1770, the Speaker was directed to order McDougall to attend at the Bar of the House to answer a complaint made against him by Mr. De Noyellis for being the supposed author or publisher of the paper signed “A Son of Liberty.”[9] On his attending, McDougall was asked whether he was or was not the author of the paper. He replied “That as the grand jury and house of Assembly had declared the paper in question to be a libel, he could not answer the question. Secondly, that as he was under prosecution in the Supreme Court, he conceived it would be an infraction of the laws of Justice to punish a British subject twice for one offense, for that no line could be run, that he might be punished without end; but he would not be understood to deny the authority of the house to punish for a breach of privilege, when no cognizance is taken of it in another Court.” The Assembly decided that this was a contempt of the authority of the house, and, since he refused to ask pardon of the house, he was ordered into the custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms, and placed in the county jail. A writ of Habeas Corpus was sued out before the Court of Justice, whereupon the sheriff notified the house and asked what he should do. A committee was appointed on Jan. 22d, 1771, “to search the journals of the house of Commons, for precedents in cases where writs of habeas corpus have been issued, to bring persons committed by the Commons before other Courts.” The committee reported on Feb. 16, that several precedents had been found, which precedents were ordered printed in the Journal of the House. It was also determined that the sheriff should be indemnified for his action in not obeying the order of the Court.