Person:Samuel Potts (12)

Watchers
Samuel Yates Potts
b.2 Mar 1821 Derbyshire, England
m. 17 May 1819
  1. Samuel Yates Potts1821 - 1894
m. 13 Dec 1854
  • HSamuel Yates Potts1821 - 1894
  • WSarah Hardy1841 - 1922
m. 11 Jan 1858
  1. Henry Potts1858 - 1861
  2. Fanny May Potts1860 - 1951
  3. Sarah Ann Potts1862 - 1941
  4. William Potts1864 - 1937
  5. Edmund Potts1866 - 1927
  6. John Potts1868 - 1940
  7. James Hardy Potts1870 - 1944
  8. Mary Eliza Potts1872 - 1873
  9. Alice Potts1874 - 1943
  10. Samuel Frances Potts1876 - 1961
  11. Walter Lawerance Potts1879 - 1967
  12. Ethel Elizabeth Potts1881 - 1957
  13. Alfred Earnest Potts1884 - 1896
  14. Edwin Harrie Potts1887 - 1959
Facts and Events
Name Samuel Yates Potts
Gender Male
Birth? 2 Mar 1821 Derbyshire, England
Marriage 13 Dec 1854 West Maitland, New South Wales, Australiato Margaret McKinnon
Marriage 11 Jan 1858 Nundle, New South Wales, AustraliaPeel River Goldfields
to Sarah Hardy
Death? 4 Aug 1894 Wingham, New South Wales, Australia
Burial? Wingham, New South Wales, Australia
The Maitland Mercury & Hunter River General Advertiser (NSW : 1843-1893) Saturday 6 March 1852 Page 2 of 4
Maitland Circuit Court.

(Before his Honor the Chief Justice.)

Thursday, March 4.

Uttering a forced order.

David M'Lean was indicted for uttering a forced order for £8 11s. 3d., purporting to be drawn by 0. E. Doyle on B. Doyle, Esq., Midlorn, Maitland, and dated Killarney, 10th March, 1850, in favor Mr. S. Potts or bearer, at Maitland, on the 20th June, 1851, knowing the same to be forged, with intent to defraud Samuel Cohen.

Mr. Parefoy appeared for the defence; attorney, Mr. Ward.

The witnesses called were Cyrus Edward Doyle, Andrew Doyle, Patrick Quinn, Louis Patrick Doyle, and Samuel Cohen.

Mr. C. E Doyle lately lived at the Paterson River, but formerly resided at Killarney, Namoi River; witness was in the habit of drawing orders on his brother, Mr. B. Doyle, Midlorn, Maitland ; in 1849 a party named Samuel Yates Potts was in witness's employ, and in November, 1849, witness drew an order in his favor, but did not draw any in March, 1850, or any part of 1850 ; the order produced was not drawn by witness ; the only order witness drew in favor of Mr. Potts was distinctly stated on its face to be "for shearing" ; it was for less than £4 ; did not know where Mr. Potts was now ; the endorsement "S. Y. Potts" was on the cheque produced, but witness did not know in whose writing it was ; no part of the order pro- duced was written by witness ; this order was first presented to witness last September by Mr. Cohen's clerk, Mr. Levien, and subsequently by Mr. Cohen, and witness wrote on it "forgery." Cross-examined.- Witness had seen Mr. Potts write, but could not say whether the endorsement on the cheque produced was in his writing or not ; many orders drawn by witness had been received by Mr. Cohen, and subsequently pre- sented to witness ; the writing on the order produced was closely like witness's. By his Honor : The order was presented to witness at a time when he was taking up all the orders drawn by himself, his brother being then drawing on him. By Mr. Purefoy : Other orders were presented by Mr. Levien to witness at the same time, and paid, but witness at once said this order was a forgery ; witness first heard of this order in April, 1851, by letter from his brother, Mr. F. M. Doyle, and in May, 1851, witness cautioned Mr. Samuel Cohen personally, in his office, against taking such an order, and when Mr. Cohen spoke to him in September witness reminded him of this; witness knew nothing of the prisoner ; Mr. Potts was not in witness's employ in 1850; witness's memory was usually very good, but he was very ill at present, and it might not be now quite so good; to the best of witness's recollection he drew no order at all in 1850, having left Killarney early that year, and gone to the Paterson, his brother going to Killarney ; witness had never been in the habit of keeping written memorandums of the orders drawn by him; witness knew Patrick Quinn; he lived at Killarney ; no doubt witness had drawn orders in Quinn's favor. --- Mr. Doyle was further examined at some length by Mr. Purefoy, his Honor, and the jury, and wrote his signature in court, which with other papers signed by him were compared with the signature to the order produced. A magnifying glass was also used to discover whether there were marks on the order produced of tracing from an original. -Mr. Andrew Doyle, brother of Mr. C. E. Doyle, did not believe the order produced to be in the writing of Mr. C. E. Doyle, through greatly like it ; witness thought he should under any circumstances have known that it was not his brother's writing; would not swear that it was not. The witness was further examined as to the time when, and period for which, Mr. Potts was shearing for his brother. The order produced was, in April, 1851, shown to witness by prisoner at Quinn's eating house, and witness referred him to his brother, Mr. F. M. Doyle, who was then in the verandah ; prisoner showed it to Mr. F. M. Doyle, who immediately pronounced it to be a forgery, and advised prisoner to leave it with Quinn, as Mr. C. E. Doyle would be up in a few days, and Quinn could show it to him ; prisoner consented to do so; believed some other of witness's brothers was at the house also at that time, but did not know whether the order was shown to them.

Cross-examined : Quinn was standing by and prisoner handed him the order, as advised ; there were several persons about at the time.; Mr. F. M. Doyle said aloud that he believed the order to be a forgery, and witness heard him and Quinn both say there was no order for that amount drawn in favor of Potts. By the jury : Prisoner said it made little difference to him, that the order did not belong to him, but that he got it from a person named Bell. - Patrick Quinn did keep a house of accommodation on the Namoi, but was now a carrier ; remembered the circumstances about the order being presented by prisoner, and described them, corroborating generally Mr. A. Doyle's evidence, but being unable to distinguish exactly what was said by each of the three brothers present ; Mr F. Doyle said it was not right, or was a forgery ; prisoner left it with witness to be shown to Mr. C. E. Doyle, but that same evening prisoner came and said he was going to Maitland with his load, and that it was all right, and he'd take the order himself to Mr. Doyle, in Maitland ; witness then handed prisoner the order again, and prisoner took it; witness believed prisoner said the order was his, and prisoner afterwards told witness he got the order from Bell ; witness cautioned prisoner that he thought the order was wrong, that Mr. Doyle never drew orders of that, amount, and that he did not believe Potts had been there shearing that year ; witness cashed an order for Potts about three years since, drawn by Mr. C. E. Doyle. By the jury : The order produced appeared now in the same state as it was then. - Mr. Louis P. Doyle was also at Quinn's at that time, and deposed to what passed ; prisoner brought the order to witness first, and asked him if he thought it was all right; witness told him he thought it was; on now looking closely at the order produced witness thought it was not his brothers writing, although then, looking slightly at it as it lay in prisoners hand, he thought it was; witness was not present when prisoner subsequently spoke to his brothers; Mr. C. E. Doyle usually drew orders on his brother payable at certain stores in Maitland, and not at Midlorn. - Mr. Samuel Cohen, storekeeper, West Maitland, received the cheque produced from the prisoner; that was in July, 1851; witness gave him £5 for it; witness's impression then and now was that it was a good one ; witness at first refused to cash the order because prisoner had not sold his wool to him as he promised, but prisoner told witness that Messrs. Dickson, who had bought the wool, had refused to cash the order, saying it was no good; witness said "Well, at all events, I'll give you £5 for it." Cross-examined : Witness had taken numbers of these orders, and felt confident at the time the order was genuine, and he still thought so ; when witness presented the order with others to Mr. Doyle, Mr. D. reminded him he had given notice to witness not to take such an order; witness said he might have done so, but he (witness) could not remember all verbal notices he received. By the jury : M'Lean brought down his own wool, two loads; witness knew nothing against his character ; he wave no account of how lie got the order By his Honor: Witness understood the hesitation of Messrs. Dickson, and the expression " no good," to refer only to the fact that from there being many brothers of the Messrs. Doyle, and the rule they followed of each only paring the orders drawn on himself, while they were very frequently up the country tor month«, there was often a delay for months before such orders were paid, although they were always paid ultimately ; witness handed the order to Mr. C. F. Doyle, at his request, and took his receipt for it.

The jury, without requiring to hear Mr. Purefoy for the defence, at once acquitted the prisoner, on the ground that no guilty knowledge was proved against him.

M'Lean was then discharged, his Honor telling him that he left the dock without a stain on his character, although the result of the trial did not affect the question as to the genuineness of the order.

At the recommendation of his Honor, Mr C E Doyle returned the order in dispute to Mr Cohen.