Untitled

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 6, Issue 316, 19 October 1865, Page 2

Miss Mahoaukt Little. —The cause, Little v. Brauigan, says the Daily Times of the 25th, waa tried in the Supreme Court yesterday, and it resulted in the discharge of the jury without a verdict being given. The plaintiff, Margaret Little, who figured in the Jarvy case, sought compensation from the Commissioner of Police, for illegal arrest and imprisonment, in having caused Sergeant Mallard to take her from on board the Alhambra, in which she purposed sailing for Melbourne under an assumed name. The facts were published at the time. Miss Little sued Mallard in the Magistrate’s Court, aud obtained damages for an assault, or for taking her from the steamer. At the trial yesterday, the plaintiff was allowed to amend the record, to meet her ease, by adding a replication of fraud to a plea of accord and satisfaction—in other words, by pleading that she had been tricked into signing a document which was a most explicit undertaking not to bring any action against Mr Branigan. The Judge, in summing up, put this part of the case in a way which may fairly bo interpreted as a declaration of bis belief that there was no fraud but that Miss Little thoroughly understood what she signed. The jury were out of Court nearly three hours and a half, and were then discharged, it is no secret that nine of their number were, from the first, agreed on a verdict for the defendent. The case may be tried again this session, after the Special Jury causes, or at a future sitting, as the plaintiff may be advised. The Court does not sit again until Monday, when the Special Jury otusea will be commenced. i