Joseph Moss Ashton (1837 - aft. 1875)

Born 5 Jul 1837 in Seaton Sluice (near Newcastle upon Tyne), United Kingdom

Husband of Hannah (Coghlan) Ashton — married 2 Mar 1859 (to 1875) in Christ Church, South Yarra, Victoria

Descendants

Died after 1875 after age 37 in Australia

Problems/Questions Profile manager: April Post [send private message]

Biography

This biography was provided by JanetteX.

Joseph was born in 1837. Joseph Ashton sailed from gateshead to Melbourne on the Amsterdam in 1856 as a 19 year old. He was a butcher. There is a fancy portrait of him on ancestry.com in the Ashton family tree. Furthermore, there are two stories involving him which will be copied here, first being his disappearance and 2nd a courtcase he was involved in:

1/From information I have gathered to date, JM Ashton went missing sometime between 1875 and 1878. (*note by April: According to my research regarding this and various newspaper reports I found in the Melbourne papers it seems clear that JM Ashton went missing around June/July of 1875.) Family stories vary but the most likely is that he left his home in Richmond to go on a cattle buying venture. He took a large amount of cash with him and the last time he was seen was when he crossed the Murray River. A family member supposedly saw him in Sydney some time after with the woman who had been the governess of his children in Melbourne. He apparently went bankrupt twice, the last time being 1875. His loss of fortune is evidenced by his three sons, William and Thomas (twins) and Harry Moss having to leave Melbourne Grammar in 1874. William moved to Sydney where he as married. He named one of his children Sydney Joseph Moss Ashton, which is curious! I am currently investigating the birth and death of a William H Ashton who died in Sydney in 1921 (same year as William G but different suburb!). William H's father was Joseph M Ashton and his mother was Elizabeth. I am waiting to receive the birth certificate of William H. Apparently a family member saw photos of the "polo playing Ashtons" in a well known magazine and commented on the resemblence to Joseph Moss. Harry Moss's boys moved to Sydney and I believe a couple of them may have been part of the "polo playing" Ashtons. Meanwhile poor Hannah, wife of JMA, was left with all of the children. It appears she carried on the butcheries for some time but ended up running a hotel or boarding house in Victoria Street Hotham (now North Melbourne). The Cattle Drive story written by Harry Moss, which took place in 1884-1885, confirms Hannah had boarders.

2/ Australian Newspapers

Histori c Australian Newspapers, 1803 to 1954

SUPREME COURT CRIMINAL SIT-

TINGS.

TUESDAY, DEC. 24.

(Before His Honour Mr. Justice Molesworth)

THE "THREE-UP" CASE.

Joseph Thompson, Austin Saqui, William Branch, and William Anderson, were again placed on the floor of the Court on a charge of conspiring to defraud Joseph Moss Ashton. Mr. Dunne appealed for the Crown, with him Mr. Ireland, (Q.C., and Mr. Aspinall. Mr. Wrixon appeared to watch the case for the private prosecutor. Mr. Michie, Q.C., de- fended Thompson and Saqui ; Mr. C. A. Smyth defended Branch and Anderson.

The following evidence was taken :

Joseph Jennings, manager of the Colling- wood branch of the National Bank, examined by Mr DUNNE.- Knew Saqui and Branch, who have an account at the bank as Saqui and Blanch. Produced pay slip dated 29th Sep- tember, signed by Austin Saqui and paying in cheques and silver. The cheques produced are the ones. (These cheques were produced by defendants ; they were for £45 each, and were signed by "Saqui and Branch," in favour of Thompson ; and were dated 24th September.) The signature is Saqui's.

Mr. DUNNE.-What is the effect of a man drawing a cheque and paying it in to his own

account?

Witness,- It would leave the account just where it was.

Mr. DUNNE.-But at balancing-day, does it not make it appear that a larger amount was paid into his account than really was the

case?

Witness.-Yes ; but the balance in both cases would be the same.

Cross-examined by Mr. MICHIE.-Branch and Saqui are in partnership. I don't know that they have given cheques, and having afterwards taken them up themselves, pa¡d in the cheques to their account to keep their cash account clear. They may have

done so.

Mr. MICHIE.-Is it an uncommon thing for customers, where they have given a cheque and have afterwards paid it with their own money, to put it into their own account, so as to keep a record of their transactions ?

Witness.-I have often known instances of the kind.

His HONOUR.- Has a man who has taken up his own cheque, paid it without any en-

dorsement ?

Witness.-Yes.

Mr. MICHIE.-In other words, he would make the bank keep his cashbook instead of

himself.

Witness.-Just so.

Mr. MICHIE.-And more especially where two men are in partnership.

Witness.- Yes, but the bank would not

approve of this course being done constantly. The defendants had not a large account : an operative one.

Cross-examined by Mr. SMYTH.- Branch does not operate on the account. Saqui does.

Re-examined.- Branch had a private ac- count then, but it is closed now.

To Mr. SMYTH.-The amount of the account was only £2 19s.

A Juror.-Is it usual to pay in cheques without any endorsement to show that the transaction is a genuine one, or that the cheques passed through anybody's hands but his own '! Witness.-It has been done.

The Juror.-Then the result is that his account may be fictitious.

The Foreman.-He increases his nominal capital without anything to represent it; so that he may get credit on it if he wants it.

Witness.-It is known only to the bank. In cases where it is done, it is often men- tioned, and the reason explained for the

course taken.

A Juror (to his Honour).-May we ask if it

was done on this occasion ?

His HONOUR.- I think not, as the witness can only speak to what passes in his own knowledge.

Mr. MICHIE explained that there could not be a false balance, as the moment the cheque was paid in to an account, at the same instant it was placed to his debit, so that the account was squared.

This closed the case for the Crown.

Mr. Michie and Mr. Smyth submitted that there was no case to go to the jury, but after a short discussion his Honour declined to withdraw the case from them.

Mr. MICHIE then addressed the jury, re- marking that he was aware a certain amount of prejudice existed against any persons who were accused of cheating at cards, but he asked that all such feelings should be at once dismissed, and that the case should be con- sidered as if it were against people of another walk of life. At the outset the jury would have to see that there was no actual existing conspiracy on the part of the defendants, for a mere attempt to cheat by any one of them would not sustain this indictment. That there was a conspiracy rested exclusively on the evidence of Ashton and Alderson, and what sort of witnesses were they ? And first of Ashton. If ever there was an untrust- worthy person in the witness-box, Ashton was that individual.' For at the police-court his version, in the first instance, was that he had fallen into Thompson's clutches early in the evening, and was taken by him to several

places to make him drunk, and that he was then brought into the Casino, where he was the victim of unfair play. Ashton could not only tell a lie , about going to hotels, but could tell lies with circumstance, namely- the drinking. And it was only when con- fronted with another witness that he with- drew from that position, and said he only met Thompson at twelve o'clock. For such men as he, there was a very good maxim, " False in one, false in all ;" and where they found him deliberately persisting for a long time in a series of untruths, they ought to scout his evidence, even if it was stronger than it was. But even supposing that he was trustworthy, his evidence amounted to very little. And it should be recollected that he had a good motive for bringing this charge, for he had dishonoured his cheque ; and if he was successful in this prosecution he had a chance of saving £300. Then, as to his evi- dence, he said that Thompson once called "tails," and lost. Now, he would hardly call tails if he knew that there were not three tails on the coins Saqui held, for it was a physical impossibility, according to the pro- secutor's version, that tails could turn up. Then as to Alderson, he should call him an approver in effect, for he looked on at the swindle, -made no attempt to stop it, and afterwards tried to be "in it," as he expressed it. His evidence was altogether unreliable, for it was not the first time that an impudent barefaced rascal tried to bounce men out of

their money ; and in this case he put it that Alderson was simply trying it on, and en- deavouring to frighten the defendants into paying him some money. Little regard should be paid to his evidence ; for if, out of the witness-box, he could use a solemn appeal with a mental reservation, what possible trust could they place in such a fellow, when he had gone through the form (to him) of kissing the bible ? There was a certain amount of consistency in all disgrace-

ful scoundrels, and they were not likely to be dishonest outside and become suddenly

honest when they gave evidence. The learned gentleman concluded by urging that the jury could not convict on mere suspicion, but on positive belief of his guilt.

Mr. SMYTH also addressed the jury, charac- terising the affair as a trumpery and farcical one, and urging that there was no proof of conspiracy on the part of his clients.

The following evidence was given for the

defence :

Barnett Thompson, brother of defendant Thompson, examined by Mr. MICHIE, said, - I am manager for my brother and Coleman, at Tattersalls. I remember the evening of the 23rd September. My brother was playing "devil's pool" at the Temple of Pomona. He lost £140 ; at least, so he said. I saw Ashton there, first in the billiard room. He was playing props at the time, and won money from Sloman. He then proposed hazard ; this was afterwards, in the Casino.

His HONOUR.-Was this after he left the Temple of Pomona?

Witness.- Yes. Ashton came into the Casino, and danced. Hle asked my brother how much he had lost. My brothersaid £140. Ashton replied, "I never knew you to get pecked before." He added that they were playing hazard down the street, and he asked my brother to go with him. My brother said he had no money ; and Ashton said, " I have got a tenner ; we'll go halves." They then went down the street, and I saw nothing more of them till I closed our place, about two o'clock. After closing the place I went to Tod's billiard room. I saw my brother gambling, and asked him how he got on. He replied that he had been partners with Ashton, and had lost money. I was present when they afterwards played " three up," about six or seven in the morning ; there were nine people in the room at the time. Saqui said to my brother, " We have been sufferers this evening, I'll toss you îor£i0, in or out." They went to the table, and commenced to toss. Ashton followed them, and said he would back Saqui. My brother said, ' ' You've been partners with me all the evening ; don't bet, Joe, but if you do, back me." Ashton said, " No I won't, you're too crooked, I'll have nothing to do with you." "Crooked" means unlucky. Ashton then said to Anderson, "I'll back Saqui for a fiver." Anderson said "Done; I'll wait on you." They tossed till Ashton owed Ander- son £40. Ashton then said, "I'll go you double or quits." They did so, and Ash- ton won, making them even. Ander- son then sat down, and said he would bet no more, as he could not win by double or quits-lie could not win or lose. Ashton replied, "You can bet as you like; I'll go for a tenner this time." They did so. They continued tossing in and out for three quarters of an hour with varying luck. There were several large tosses. The largest was tor £100. It ended by Ashton being in Anderson's debt £340. I can't tell how many tosses there were. Could not count them. It might take more than a minute to settle a toss. Two seconds would do to toss up and see the coins. My brother said he would toss no more, as he had made a recovery on the evening. Ashton said, "No, don't; keep on, Joe, and toss for me." My brother refused, saying, "If you want to toss, toss for your- self." I heard Ashton propose to Anderson to toss for £50. He pulled out a cheque for £45 by my brother, which he said he had won at devil's pool in the early part of the even- ing, and he put £5 to it, Anderson, in reply to Ashton's challenge, said he'd toss for £40. They tossed, and Ashton won. Anderson said, "I'll toss no more. You don't give a man a show to keep his money. You want it all back." Ashton then said, " I'm going," and walked into the hall. He called my brother out, but l did not hear what passed. He came back and said that he would give a cheque for £300 if Anderson would toss him till £100 was won. Anderson con- sented ; they tossed four times. Ashton won the first, Anderson the next three, making him winner of £300. Anderson called for champagne and sodawater. Ashton said " I won't drink with you - you are too mean you won't give a man a chance of winning his money back. But I'll go outside with you, and give you the first hit on the nose for

£50." Anderson refused to accept the offer, as he said he was not a fighting man. The tossing was over, and Alderson, Ashton, my brother, and myself were left in the room. Alderson said to Ashton, "I'll take you ten to five that I'll do a ten before a seven " (with dice).' That is considered fair odds with fair dice, I believe, but I am not versed in dice. Alderson put his hand in his pocket, drew two dice, and drew my brother's atten- tion ; and my brother put up his hand, saying, "You shan't use those instruments in my house." I saw the things. They were dice, but I could not tell if they were fair. Alder son put them in his pocket again. Alderson told me afterwards that if my brother would have allowed him, he would have won a lot of money from Ashton. This was after Ash- ton left. They played dice. They were got from our bar. My brother asked the barman to hand the dice. Before Ashton left they played dice ; first Alderson and Ashton, and then my brother and Ashton. Ashton left about half-past eight or nine o'clock; he had won £20 from my brother at the dice. Saqui came to my brother's house about eight o'clock the same evening. Hle brought £90 for the gambling debt, and £5 he had borrowed. The £90 represented two cheques I had locked in the safe that morning, given across the table by Branch and Saqui when gambling. Could not exactly say if those producad were the

ones ; they were similar. I have the manage- ment of the safe, and all the money I get I lock up in it. I have seen over £2,000 in my brother's chest at once.

Cross-examined.- That, would not be the takings of the house alone. We bank every morning. The, money would be my brother's own. I have seen several times £500, £800, £1,000, £1,000, and £2,000 once, in the safe. To my knowledge my brother is proprietor of Tattersall's since February last. Could not ex- actly say how often he had those large sums of money ; more than twice. I don't keep the books; Mr: Henry Coleman does - my brother's partner's brother. Isaac Coleman is the name of my brother's partner. As a general rule, I take the money in business from the safe, and lodge it in the bank. The money got in the hotel I keep in a bag, and take to the bank, if I get up early enough. I have nothing to do with the other money; it, is my brother's own. I either hand it back to him or give him the keys to get it. " Crooked" has different meanings if applied to a horse and a man. If a man is partner with another and plays in a game and loses, and if he wants to play another game, his former partner says ",I won't go on with you, you are too 'crooked.' " I should infer that it implied he was un- lucky.- I never knew it to be applied in any other sense. I never heard it used in any gambling transaction similar to the present. I was in the back parlour the whole time of the gambling. Irvine went away after they commenced to toss the second time - after Ashton got even the first time. I should say he stayed for two or three tosses after that. Irvine and Swift both went together. I could not particularise the time after the second tossing began that they stayed, as l might make a mistake. It would be impossible to say if they were five minutes or twenty in the room. I could not state the time as I had no idea I would ever be asked. Branch was in the room, betting on Saqui against my brother. He lost; I don't know

how much. The £90 was for money lost by Saqui and Branch. Other money was also lost by them besides this. I could not say if I saw any Commercial Bank notes pass, as I do not know. I don't know what sort of notes were passing. I think fives, tens, and ones. Branch and Saqui both paid money across the table to my brother-notes, fives and ones. They were passed backwards and forwards, as the case may be, by my brother and the others. Sometimes they would win : sometimes my brother. On the morning of the 24th, there was between £300 and £100 in the safe. To the best of my belief, I had paid money into the bank on the 23rd. I paid none on the 24th, for I went to sleep on the sofa. I believe I paid in on the day pre- ceding.

His HONOUR.-When people are playing " three up," when do they change sides in call- ing? How long does one man call to the

other?

Witness.-They change when it occurs that one has called correctly ; then the other man

has the call.

His HONOUR.- Supposing the event is de- cided-suppose the man won - does he have

the call?

Witness.-Yes.

His HONOUR.-At the time the £40-double or quits-was bet, who called ?

Witness.-My brother. He called "heads," and it came tails. Saqui tossed the coins. They were the ones he had been playing with

before.

Mr. SMYTH here rose and called his Honour's attention to the fact that a gentleman who had nothing to do with the prosecution (Mr. Grave, solicitor) had in his possession the bank-book of Thompson and Coleman, and was showing it to the Crown Prosecutor. He (Mr. Smyth) had wanted to see it, but Mr. Grave refused to give it him, and handed it to some person outside the court. He would like to know how Thompson and Coleman's bank-book came into Mr. Grave's hands. It was a most extraordinary thing altogether.

Mr. DUNNE said that Mr. Grave was Ashton's solicitor. He brought in the book, but on his informing him that it was Thomp- son's private account book, he told Mr.

Grave to take it away. It was no business of his to investigate it. No doubt the bankers would produce it if they were subpoenaed.

Mr. Grave explained that the bank clerk had been subpoenaed to produce Thompson's account. He asked one of the detectives to ask the clerk for it, and the detective brought back this book. He handed it to Mr. Dunne, and Mr. Dunne gave it back to him.

His Honour said they were getting into an investigation which he really did not under- stand the meaning of. It was entirely col- lateral, and if the case went on in that way they would never get to the end of it.

Barnett Thompson, re-examined.- My brother called heads at the £40 bet and lost ; they all fell down tails. It they had not done so he would have won. I did not bet at all during the game.

William Robinson, barman at Tattersall's, examined by Mr. Smyth, said,- On 24th Sep- tember, when Ashton, with the others, came to Tattersall's he was quite sober. Ashton proposed to toss for £50, first pop. When the three-up began I was in the bar, but I could see and hear what passed in their room. Ash- ton said he would back Saqui. The first I heard about a cheque was that Ashton said he would give a cheque if Anderson tossed twice for £50. Ashton wrote a cheque, which he gave me to dry, and I handed it back to him. Alderson challenged Ashton to play at hazard. I did not hear the reply. Alderson took two dice out of his pocket, and took a sly look at them. He threw them on the table. Thompson said, "Put these away." He asked me if I had any, and I gave him dice. Alderson and Ashton, and afterwards Thompson, played with the dice. Ashton asked Thompson to lend him money.

Albert Swift, billiard-marker, examined by Mr. Michie, said when Ashton was in Tod's he had a little drop in him. He had all his wits about him. Alderson produced dice from his vest pocket, and wanted to play with them. They were played with for a little time with a young fellow, and he then put them away. This was at Tod's. I saw him afterwards pro- duce the same dice at Tattersall's. I did not see them played with; but he told me that he had offered them to Sloman to play, and he refused them. The reason he put them away at Tod's was because Mr. Bernardo came in and wanted to join, and Alderson was afraid of being found out. One of the dice was bad. A "despatch" has fours, fives, and sixes on it. He had trafficked on dice for the last six months. Saw Alderson at the Casino door on the afternoon of 24th. He said "Joe Ashton lost £100 last night, and they have been having him with a "grey," and I must have a score or two out of it or I will make it pretty hot for them." These were the very words he used. He told me that he had spoken to Saqui about it, and Saqui said, " Shut up ! I have nothing to do with it." He added that he had offered Thompson the "despatch" dice ; that Thompson bet Ashton two to one he did not do a ten before a seven with a dice, and Ashton won. He called Thomp- son a fool for not having the despatches. The tossing in " three up" was fair. They came up heads and tails indifferently, and each won occasionally. Ashton was quite sober when he ran the foot race with

me.

Walter Irvine, billiard-marker at Tod's, examined, said, 'I recollect the morning of the 24th. Thompson and Ashton were play- ing at Tod's that day. After Thompson lost, he said to Ashton, "You dragged me here." When they got back to Tattersall's, at six o'clock, Ashton challenged some one to toss for £50. Anderson accepted it, but Ashton drew back. When they began to play " three up," Ashton said "I'll back Saqui." I re- mained twenty minutes. The tossing was fair, as far as I saw. Heads and tails came down on both sides. I think the coins were fair.

Isaac Coleman was sworn, but was not

examined.

James Bernardo, tobacconist, examined by Mr. Smyth: I was present at the Temple of Pomona, billiard-room when Alderson was asked if this affair was all square. He said "God strike me blind, it's all fair"--not " cord." I understood him to speak seriously.

Cross-examined by Mr. Dunne: I can't say who asked the question. I don't know if Saqui was there.

Alfred Harris, proprietor of the Temple of Pomona, examined: Heard of the three-up business the day after it occurred. I asked Alderson who was there. He said "I was." I thought it a deal of money to lose, and I asked if it was all square. He said "Yes, square enough, as far as I know." Anderson, I think, also asked him, and he swore it was fair, "so help his God." Somebody laughed at him when he said it was all fair, in the

first instance.

This closed the defendants' case.

Mr. Dunne then replied on behalf of the Crown, remarking on the fact that it was strange that the cheque which was given to Anderson by Ashton should have come into Thompson's possession; that Saqui and Branch should pay in to their own account their own cheques ; and that Thompson should affirm that they were not returned, but were paid into his bank. As to the fact of their having allowed Ashton to clear off the debt he incurred soon after starting, it was noto- rious that pigeons were suffered to win a little at first, to get their blood up, and make them go in more heavily and gamely ; and it was somewhat curious that Ashton never won after that time, but lost very quickly £340. He did not present Alderson as an unim- peachable witness ; but it would be a very dangerous doctrine to lay down, that when a number of bad men gathered together for an unlawful purpose none of them was to be believed when giving an account of the affair

afterwards.

His Honour then summed up, observing that the evidence of Alderson must be re- ceived with great caution, on account of the contradictory statements he had made re- garding tho affair, and also because of his endeavour to obtain a share of the money.

The jury retired at half-past five, and at a quarter to six returned into court, finding all the prisoners "Not Guilty."

The Foreman added,-Your Honour, the jury wish me to state that they do not believe a word of Alderson's evidence. That is the reason they have given the verdict they

have done.

The defendants were then discharged.

THE QUEEN V. M'GAAN.

This defendant was called on to surrender lo his bail, on a charge of embezzlement. The defendant surrendered,' but his bondsmen were not in attendance to renew the bail; After some discussion, it was agreed that a magistrate should take the bail, and that Mr. A. K. Smith should be, substituted for one of the parties Avho was previously bail. :

THE QUEEN V. I-OTHEltlNGHAM. ,

On the application of the Crown prosecutor, the recognisances of this defendant, com- mitted for molting a false declaration under the Land Act, were ordered to be estreated.

The Court then adjourned «in« cite.

... ^[1]

No more info is currently available for Joseph Ashton. Can you add to his biography?

Sources

• Janette X, firsthand knowledge. See the Changes page for the details of edits by Janette and others.

1. ↑ Entered by Janette X, Jun 25, 2011