Skip to Content

Decisions of the Superior Courts of New South Wales, 1788-1899

R. v. Maclousky [1824] NSWSupC 11

criminal procedure - hung jury

Supreme Court of New South Wales
Forbes C.J., 12 and 13 August 1824
Source: Sydney Gazette, 19 August 1824


Thursday. - ... Hugh Maclousky was indicted for stealing a heifer. The indictment included three counts, describing the property as belonging to three different owners. Upon this case the Jury retired for upwards of an hour, when the Foreman returned and informed His Honor the Chief Justice, that the Members could come to no decision, and that it was not likely they would. His Honor was pleased to observe, that, in similar cases, it was usual in England for the Jury to retire to some coffee-house till they decided upon the verdict, but as no such convenience existed here, the Gentlemen could retire to their quarters; [1] and that, most probably, by the following morning the Verdict would be returned.

Friday. - Hugh Maclousky was again placed at the bar. The Jury being called over by the Prothonotary, the Foreman stated, that the Jury could not agree, and were not all likely to agree. After some suggestions from the Chief Justice, in which His Honor recommended an adherence to the form in the Mother Country as near as circumstances would admit, at the same time urging that the Jury must be unanimous in their verdict, the Attorney General agreed, and the prisoner after some deliberation, consented to the Jury being discharged. The prisoner hereupon was discharged. In justice to the prisoner we think it necessary to subjoin, that the Attorney General informed the Court, he was now possessed of such information as to satisfy his mind that the prisoner was Not Guilty of the offence with which he had been charged.




[1] The members of the jury in criminal cases in the Supreme Court were all naval or military officers: (1823) 4 Geo. IV c. 96, s. 4.



Published by the Division of Law, Macquarie University