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

LARoE-Jordai slave, the property Of Jos Butler was
brought up on charge Of wandering large with his
pass out Of date.
lie stated that he permitted BY his master to look
out for an employer He committed to jail to await
an application for him by his master.
6ne of $50 is impossible upon the master for grant
ing such lcense.
No PAPEks.-Rob. Adams who said he was Free bu,
found withouta register was committed to jail.
THRxArs-John A. Cdrrie upon whom an examination
had at the for threatening kill Major slave of
Thos. J. Carter required give bail In the sum Of
500, to keep the peace for twelve months
NuisAScE-Thos. Evans, Martin Curry VIM Tierny
Andre" Terny, Patrick Gidsay Mch Burke Miehl Cain
and Jno Mccarthy, summoned up on a charge of
suffering quantity Of offensive remain on lot
held in common by them between Cary street and the
Dock.
The parties having assured the Mayor that the nuisance
would be sbatcd forthwith the continued till
Monday the usual fines be imposed that time upon
failure to comply with the assurance.
RuSAwAr.-Byrd, a slave, the property Of David
Carter of Booklets, arrested by Waterman Brown
ing and brought before the Mayor.
| The proper certificate given provided in such
cases
NOVEL CHARGE OF sNBEzEtENsSr-A charge OF the
most unfounded and malicious character perhaps ever re
corded in the criminal annals of this city, was preferred
matchmaker and jewellcr of this city, and man of un
eSceponabe good his relations as trader with
the public. The charge preferred for cmbezzemen
OF the works OF watch him be repaired by Mr.
Bernard and the substitution of works OF an inferior
| quality.
Joseph Bernard, the complainant stated that in the
month of January last he called upon Bartholomew and
showed him watch which, he stated had not kept reg,i
lar time He asked Mr. Il. to touch the regulator to
set right The of the disorder WAS that il ran
too fast, he could recoect about FIVE in every
fifteen. Mr. Bartholomew remarked that it was very dir.
ty and needed cleaning, and that he would with
him, he would clean it and put proper order lie
accordingly consented aud left the watch. He called for
1t in few days after, and after having il in his possession
for some time discovered not in the least improved
lie returned again Mr. Il and informed him that the
watch did not keep regular time Mr.. b. said il that was
the case he could leave IT, and that he would retain it
I'll it would so right. This he refused TO do aud remark
cd him that he took the works which were In h watch
out and substituted Others OF inferior quality for them
In reply to MrHo~son, who concerned for Mr. Bar
tholomew, he said he purchased the watch of Mr. Prem
ce about the Goth Ut last Deer and the th Jany sent
it to be repaired. He advised by Mr. Prentce with
whom he had conversation in regard TO the watch TO
send Ito Bartholomew He paid Mr. Prentice $50 in cash
for it. Had not bought it permanently when he sent il TO
Bartholomew to be repaired. lie gave Mr. Prentice
BOND for $50 in payment of it, When he asked Mr. B,r
thOomew what the value of il was or least what his
opinion of il vas, he said better than many gold
Il
watch that price Had recollection of his stating to Bar
tholomew that he could get the watch SIS. Did not
recoect whether he examined the watch particularly after
ne got II rom Bartholomew Took II back TO him and
remarked that it did keep time nreply which Bar
thoomew said If he would leave he should have IL all
right Had it since January, until 10Th of August and
never made complaint against H. OF the character the
present charge before that time After he called upon
Bartholomew for his watch in January last he (Mr
~ Instituted suit against him, for So oOO for SANDER
which suit is still pending. Was advised by his counsel
not TO enter complaint at the time there being no
positive testimony upon which to rely oefIre Wednesday
last He advised the day before yesterday Tuesdsy
by Mr. Gimer institute this charge. Knew nothing OF
suit brought by John s Clarke against Mr. Bartholo
new Tuesday. Being asked whether he had any con
versaton with Clarke about this Transaction he said he
told him about the works of his watch being Had
conversation with him until Tuesday lSst Mr. Clarke
Informed him that Bartholomew admitted in his presence
IN private conversation that he took the works OF
his watch and substituted inferior works for them and
that he sold the other with the works his watch in H.
Could not whether not he would have brolgh; iat
charge against bartholomew !! lie had received that
Information from Clarke. II Il experiences IN tn. me
chanism OF watch. Was not a matchmaker lie ALWAYS
carried one Believed the effect Of cleaning watch
would be to improve IT, Supposed the effect of cleaning
might have caused It go faster. Oue of the reaSo.
shy he believed the interior OF the watch received vas
the original works in the watch which he left TO be
repaired wa, that the joint pin in that loose. Was
II was not loose in the other. The pin in pre-
sent watch weaker. Noticed difference in the FOR.
nation of the letters in the numbers of hotI watches
The numbers in both were 1890. The noushts ia the
Sach which he got than those IN the one
he had eit To bc repaired The whole ground OF his
Identity in the difference of the watches were that the
works lOoser In the case the catch littl, fIel
down, and the crystal higher in the produced than
IA the other Could not say whether the cap the
works in his watch fastened down by Plus or screws
The ISLANDERS or pnons in his watch with the exception of
steel one, all yellow gold colorcd Supposed
one OF them gold In the present watch there
In reply Mr. GiImer who desired to have an expa-
nation to his stSnent that he advised by him to
institute that charge against Bartholomew he said that
Irua~ Int sia
ledge. lie received note from Mr. Gmer in reference
{ suit pending between himself and Mr. Bartholomew
which he (Mr g. was counsel tor him Mr.. Gilmer
rked to him. when he received the normItion that he
would be guilty of mpOundng felony he should fore
20 necessary action while in possession of such facts He
said he that that the which he left
with Bartholomew, and that it the watch which got
from him.
Mr.. y. =. Prentice examined. H. looked at
the watch and said il soi hy him Mr.. Bernard
The case he had doubt that which he gave Mr.. b.
I but did not think ihe inside the same He noticed
the springs filed more up aud the works looser in the
than in that which he sold Me-. ,rnard lie was not
workman, Ia matchmaker, We should supposed and
therefore unable define accurately the relative de-
cts aud appearances Of beth watches than the description
he had just given. The crystal Of that watch higher
'han that OF The other. The pinons also he bieyed
were higher, aud the hands longer lie received a
from Mr.. Bernard In the month Of December last f.r $50
consideration for the watch. Believed needed clean
ing when he sol! IT, Could recoect the name of the
maker did lac know whether il fastened together
with pins screws, but certain tie watch he sold Mr.
view with Mr.. Bernard in January or February Did not
know whether the watch undcrSent any repairs iu Rich
moud. Believed it repaired in Baltimore time
Gould not siy whether the numbers the watch
were altered Ills judgment was founded upon it, general
I appearance
John :. Clarke next examined. IIe said that about
the time that Mr. Robert g. Scott leaving this CITY, his
son, Capt Scott called into his house lie Informed him
that his father leaving in n few days and that he
going With hin H. and Mr. Hlrtholauow had a
s1n one Ug"t At us door very soon after He witncss
remarked n Buthoomcg that h' lawyer going away
lie of bis being engaged for Mr. Bartholomew
900 the suit pending between him and Ne Bernard Mr.
bartholomew replied that he should look for another
Iwycr lie si hattie did not know that there any
thing very particular rather embarrassing IN the SUR,
except That ~ his taking ne Vorts ont of Hy. Brnarfs
ytch and ssbsif,ry nf~ri9r N,rk' far he. That he
remarked, you'll make very little difference, they had
no person 10 prove IL against him.
~ reply Mr. I0NisOn, hc could not what induced
L. ~. L.