Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1853-08-12
CITY NEWS.

Ci1AlsuG OF EMBEZZL.ING.-In the Mayors GoUf''
Yesterday, E,u. hours were occupied in tho examination 0!
viii, m J. Bartholomew, charged with cmbczzlihg le
works Of a watch, the property OF Dir. Joseph bernard d
citizen of Iienrico county.
Mr.. Bernard was sworn and sta ted that he left his watch
with Mr.. Bartholomew in January last, 10 be repaired AZ
ter tic repairs had been made, he called and sot it. Find
ing ii did NOT keep time, he returned and informed Mir. Is.
Of that fact. Mr.. Il. took the watch and snli il wanted rec
ul,,inr, and hr would keep il awhile and regulate il. Sus.
s,outnIIy Mr.. Bernard called and got the watch, and sl!urti!
uf,,rwarj, returned and charged Mr.. Bartholomew with
having taken out Tie works of his watch aud putting other
work. in their place. Mr.. Bartholomew aaId lie would hold
him responsible Tor the charge, and proceeded to sue HIM Tor
Islander, fixing his damages at so.UuU. lhat suit is still
pending. Having been informed, u lew days ago, that MIR.
}. ). Clark, who resides next door TO mr.. h,r.holoine~.
ltwcliy establishment, had heard hi'. oaftno'o",e" uulHlt
that Ut made no dill. renee about his changing Tie works ol
Mr. BernaEd's watch, as il could not be Proved ne mad
refused 10 entertain a proposition Tor a coInpionns' = u
Islander suit, and had come 10 The determination 10 o'ins d
criminal action against Bartholomew.
Mr.. Bernard then proceeded TO point out the dillefence oe-
tween The watch he gave To Mr. Bartholomew and me "assh
lie received from him in return. This he did by Opening me
watch and pointing out in detail the discrepancies. lhere
was scarcely any resemblance between any of the several
parts of the works of his watch mud tho one obtained from
Mr.. Bartholomew. The cascs were the same, and perhaps
the outer plate OF the face Of The watch. All the remainder
had been changed. He had no doubts on the subject. Inc
works were smaller than the original works, ana dh MOI III
or fit The case like The original works. His watch was a silver
lever, for which nc paid $50, although il had originally COST
S4U or si5
Bernard, IN January last, for $50. He had exa ahmed II since
he had snld it 10 Mr. Bernard, and he wac satisfied tnai ue
works, or some portion Of them had been changed. RI, me
Ar. Bernard. thcn proceeded 10 point out tEc sefeta' paris
which he believed had been put there in place oil o'hefs Ia
ken Oui.
Mr. 5. Clark stated that n few weeks ago, he was ST.
ting in front of his hotel On Governor street, taking 10 MI
Bartholomew on The subject Of his suit with MI. Bernard
a5on. the watch, when Mr.. Bartholomew stated tlat III
made M difference about his changing the works Of MIR
H.rpurtis catch ~ IN 10 rnult moi urpye IT Ar. T.. UEucI-I
stood me remark Of Mr.. Is. as an admission that he had en-
be2zlrd ;tc works Of The watch, us charged by MI. Der.
naTd.
IN 10 this npint. the testimony was direct ana coaciGaise
az 10 NJ. Bartho!omcw's guilt. But, in this. as IN many
other cuses. it turned GU. in Inc sequel that there were U.s."
sides ~ the question.
The dt!cn,c introtuccd Messrs. Raymond and PEBBLES
aud !! young man whose name we d.: not hear, all watch
makers, 10 say whethe! or not the WORKS oi Inc "aica IN
Court were iiiosc originally put there " me maker, an"
whether lhrc wore any marks about The watch Indicating
that 4 Change Of any sind had been made. All ct these
witnesses testified that no change had been made, and pro-
cecdrd 10 pom, out various marks about the watch in sup.
pnri of their opinion. The works were certainly those OH
sina!ly Introduced, aad they could See nothing indicating. III
The slightest MANNER, that any change had been made. lho
hinge b"iwcc" Tie Ease nna The WORKS u Inc ~a.cl. had
heen brogcn, ann This waa me icaaon "hy me works dd mol
lit the case. Win (. perfect hinge the works Would III tr
cas-.
Here wc~e three witnesses, all experts in the watch l'nr,
t"<t!ivIG. hat no change had been made III The woiiS OF 'WS
watch, willie TWO ollie: witnesses testified that a change Nau
been made. In view Of inis contradictory e''Hthcc' ne
Mayor directed that hr. Hicks, a MATCHMAKER IN 'He cs'ao
i<amcnt Of Ma-srs. Mitchell! IL Tyler, esteemed one OF me
best and most experienced IN The city, ut sunlhio'e" u 'A
tity In The lrLn.ises.
lr lIras sonn came into Court, was sworn, and a!'e'
closely rxaminin. the watch throughout, stated tla! no
chance tad been made in the original works. me WORKS
auw IN The watch were undoubtedly the same winch We"
pit&ci thurs At the timc tie watch was mace; ana ar. -
purc'c!rri IA pin, "gt "a:uu. marks and pecuiia'iucs 'oG"'
III" watch which rAt'si:@h h!na i'h. itr WORKS = u" NV
ra-r we're i!1sn nnginaiy made io! IT,. lie could ~, 800
var hal any portion al the works had been rnih.'i IN"
numb IS IN t; cIsr and The ~orSS cuffrdP2hdt"' ~ w
evidence ilr,, nrI,irr itui been recently engraved. ~:
Thought the watch was worth from s4O 10 SID.
4 Mr.. Fur:nn. was then -w"in l"f the accused. lh"P'i
To n .i"-iinn from Mr.. llUwisnn, the counsel Tor me accused
he stated dat lie would M; believe Mr.. ). Cla'E, on ms
oath.
sci Tor Mr.. Bernard. and in reply 10 4 question, stated ,hat
liz would believe Mr.. Clark, On his oath hrcaGSc te hn
never iirau! Mr. Is yrraciiy called into question.
Here HE cIsn rested, when the Mlyor stated Thai me CIV.
.icnr,. was conclusive 10 his mind that there hai been u"
zZlgi,rni, as had hrrn aHr.'l. liz, ihctr!otcr Vi u"
i,.aIl.tron IN promptly di-charGing Tic accused.
TILE ilENHlGu Robbery Cause.-The examination
nf The adjourned cnge o.. Sn""', Hr"vG,ns. ans Thorpe
cn..- ri will, tuahia. 4 stranger IL llcn.ir" county, On ''c
5r ol July last. ~as resumed at ienr:r" c"nrI,ti"Hs", !"
III, t!ly. ys-lcrIaY, at J. O'Clock, and continued Ill The
Ii.nt ri sun.srE.
vlrinu- new witnesses were introduced ana rs"mtncd.-
Itn.ir L.. iimnmy led directly Ia IN" belief that Ir mlHS'n"
,If..a.r, .Hyi,s.h 20 have lrrn r"h'r'! bi $ns""t - -,
was Iin rrrs.l uhn r.!ur.! :h" Rev. Mr.. Rove. on h"ati a
parkrr boat, On fhr morning al The ID. h NJ. ~'rn !" 'nr
;rIy ii HE accused. IL" answered 10" d""e'rIt'"n u 'hr
uaf.pn air>i,I hy Sun,ol ~ TO-, AMI the MONEY lost by
VII. Rowe. On board The l.Ilr, correspondent with ti'ii >ttn
n the nrsr,.s.ion, ni che stranger"
nirrr.s,.. we've also introduced, who testified hat
M, i. ~, m.n alleged - have been T"hhri by Hmnnt "
Ca. IN HIS Say - mic!,m"ni, ate: hr had been in TN. cue.
iody III lite hrcGaci. rms iesuE'"L.. >cr'nei u se'''E W.
uncstt"it al murder.
aud ". ". cfrmp AID Ilns. 7. August, Es'is., a'ly ana
inrcniousiy irf-ndrd III" prisoners /:
the discussion was long aud Ingenious an bo!h SIDES iiHT-
ius Ac,u ,nua..t Ia i c!u-c ihiat -Hn. Sc, III" question was
IA ia. t,rri wi,1 ,.iEarL"l H." prisoners, 10 appear
:, -, ,,r, ,-,, 81, lin ti,t.If I.ILri. ~ .s Iltli ar tlr al !
fsnc" robtcfyD nj which they stand ctarse!, i'a: vs. .r-
fused.
10 KEEP THE PEAGE.-William liardwickc, a youth
a3on, - Year, OF age, appeared before The hayor Yesterday
IN answer 4 peace warrant, taken out by 'oih " iia"ncr'
alleging" that .~lia,dwickc had Violently assaulted him vim the
stat: Of a broom, aud subsequently drew from his pocaet u
nis,ut md lfraa:.ncd To shoot him. The complainant, in
rcply 10 a question irom tic a.ayor, stated that he had tears
that uardw!cke would carry his threat mo e,ccul!on, or IN
thr l,nouap- nf HE law, "wuuld do him some bodily IaI:a.'
II m! wicke wa. therefore required To give security III thf sum
81, siUu TO kern The pace lDr the space OF twelve h.oEihs
I'M. n quisitinu he complied with, asd was discla'sed. |
II j. due 10 Nr !iagEcr tilat We siiua.d say, that he made
, uo,.,, runsst al u 10 suppress his name from amongst
.olr.r reports. We fully appreciated Tie motive winch
rrarrl,; IL" rtulrSl, Tor VIZ arc h"a'" OF lc ct'cacl
grnucm,n feel At having their names IN NE proctrainss oi
Ihr Police Courts: yet 80 are sM ICED shat MIR. llgncr, a
printer. should place ~ low an estimate Gron our s2nse. as
10 make sncl n ioulisll request.
uusTINGS COURT, YESTERDAY.
The Grand Jury returned true bills against Ensberry and
others concerned in the Spicer gambling case. Also, against
4 Good. for retailing ardent spirits vIth0ni license. Inc
C,anI jury were hen discharged.
IN the ease .! the C"rpofatIoh against fnr"n q basEer,
Wiz, ,or mrsirucanrr, there was a ime OF So and COSTS
In tn, case al liz Commonwealth rs Andrew AtdIne.cn,
;t assault, The gary could 10: anre", ana inc case was con-
timed unlil to-day.
until the next term.
|.
TENNESSEE.
Nashville, august 9, ls53.-CompIe'e returns from thir-