Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1853-08-12

proper He inferred from Clsrke conversation ,h
ne saed Mr. Bartholomew 10 proceed against Bernard
Tor the SANDER. He remarked the time that Bernard
was an msginuy man, aud would DO ant to form erro
Ideas upon matters Of the character issue
him and Bartholomew.
Capt Bernard came to him the canal whore he VA,
engaged and informed him OF the transaction which tool
pace between himself and Bartholomew He said Bar
oome~ was about to proceed against him for SANDER
~ so~od MIN the watch and upon Examination discoy
gu at ihe number the Case correspon,ed with ,h.,
on me running part OF the watch He brough, Mr. B.r
s"enuon TO IL and he remarked that NJ Bartholo.
new might have made the number, corrcsoon5 n
'hen said was possible to do So but Il would not a,
| cape scrutiny. NV o.
Mr.. Raymond examined. He said n.
"Neh maker Was engaged Ia the busineas ne.rIv 90
years Carried Il ON extensively one time and h All,
way sufficient experience TO enable him TO iud,. o ,h
qualities OF watch aud it, mechanical formation Work
eu with bartholomew nearly two months. Was GmiI,r
win the practice OF watchmakcrsi regard to the numh
ing OF Watches Before the plates are guilt the nunh 4
engraved, IL altered after IL will tarush, aud become
ohck. 30 That no alteration could be made in the mum
detected. ' "
There was no alteration made in the name Of tho ms,
Net Nhr. Raymond had the watch and examined il a.
Ne gave his testimony Tho why the works or
least the inside OF the watch loose in the case was
because the hinge was burs,ed and did sui,
'negontph III the hinge the works would Ger.
family ut the case The number in the case and on the in
sue were the same which should always be the case so
As the originals are not separated IL the pins ON the
ia became worn all would get loose Was confident that
the works OF that watch made for the case Believed
that the little mnutic in watch would be very ant TO
escape me observation OF an inexperienced judge He
should thnk that watch, when valued at $40 or
$40 The works in it first class for a silver watch
was probable that In the regulation u il some atera.
IONS may be made in the dial or other parts oft
Mr.. Hicks matchmaker of this city, was summoned
up by order OF the Mayor He stated that il was not
tomay with makers put the same number in anv two
watches, except by mistake Never a case in which
II had been DONE IL usual put the number on tho
case and inside IL frequently happens that the inside of
silver cased watch may be as good and perhaps better
than that of gold watch. lie knew half dozen differ
ent DESCRIPTION oil watches TO be made
IN his name. Never any of them with the same
number The original johnson was dead for several
years, but there are watches made in his name
The numbers the inside and always
except they may differ through mistake.
The watch was handed to Mr.. Hicks and after examn-
ing ielosely with his mAgnying glass declared it posi-.
lively 10 be the original number As was remarked nv
the previous witness Mr. RAYMOND he said the number
being put on before the gliding impossible to alter
e without leaving sufficient lead detection
lie discovered the makers that watch john.
ston and not johnson as he first thought II. never
knew the same number any watch made by him TO be
on second He next examined the pinons, all of which,
according TO Mr.. Bernars statement except one which
steel yellow gold color and one real cold
Mr. Hicks stated that these pinons were always made Of
steel Nothing else would answer the purpose lie had
no hesitation IN saying that tbs works of that watch
made Tor the case There was appearance Of its being
-chtted for that case
TWAS watch of ten which could be seen to ct
so we'll He should suppose it valued when new for
about s45.
Mr. PEBBLES, another matchmaker corroborated direct
ly the testimony Of Mr.. Raymond and Mr.. Hicks
Mr. Collier, ayoung man who worked with Mr. Ray
mond at the time that Mr. Bernard left the watch TO he
repaired gave some testimony the charge made by
Mr. Bernard against Bartholomew Of his having taken the
works out of hi, watch
Mr. Thomas Furlong was noxt examined. He said he
knew Mr. John ; Clarke since he Richmond.
From his knowledge Of his character BEHAVED HIN
TO BE UTTERLY USwoRrHr OF CREDIT UFoN Darn.
In reply TO Mr. Glmer, he said he lived Frank st.
opposite the Odd Fellows Hail. lie should be happy
with the permission of the Court state which
induced him TO form that opinion Of Mr. Clarke veractv
The Mayor stated il unnecessary, Il was suih
cien to say that he had good influence him
to that conclusion.
The case was discharged must saw, much the adj
vantage Of Bartholomew The whole affair seemed to have
originated in malice. 1t failed, however like all such un-
dgufed proceedipps