The Sun.
London, England, 1844-08-22 00:00:00

OLDIE V. GARDINER.

This was an action on the case against an attorney for
negligence.
Mr. Martin and Mr. Robinson far the plaintiff ; Mr.
Knowles, Mr. Watson, and Mr. Cowling for the de-
fendant.

The plaintiff in this case had formerly been an artist,
and had, in the exercise of his profession, saved a sum
of about 3001. Ile subsequently entered the church, and
in the beginning of the year 1840 he wrote to the de-
fendant, a solicitor, with whom he had for some time
been acquainted, to consult him about an investment for
this sum. The defendant directed him to pay the money
into Barclay, Tritton, and Co.'s Bank to the defendant
credit with the Lancaster Bank, and shortly after wrote
to say that he had obtained an eligible investment on the
wjnt and several bond of two persons of the name of
ines, father and son, the elder being a farmer at Chip-
ping, near Clithero, and the younger keeping a shop as
a chemist and druggist at Manchester. He described
the father as possessed of a nice estate, and the son as
having married into a respectable family. The de-
fendant, it appeared, had subsequently lent the
same parties 9001. on his own account. It proved that
the farm cultivated by Mr. Baines the elder, he Lad
in right of his wife, by whose father it was left to her for
life, and after her death to her children. The son
carried on business for some time at Manchester, but
failed in qualifying as a surgeon, fell into difficulties,
and was finally obliged to give up his shop—his wife,
who was of a respectable family, but who brought hint
no fortune, being obliged to go back to her friends. It
appeared, too, that at the time the money was lent, the
father was not in good credit, and proved unable to
repay it.
Mr. KNOWLES addressed the jury for the defendant.
contending that the services which he had sought to
perform for the plaintiff were those of friendly advice,
and not in the course of his business as an attorney ;
and that therefore he was not required to do more than
take the same care in investing the money of the plain-
tiff as he had done in investing his own.
His Lordship summed up, and
The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Das
mages, 3001.

OXFORD ClRCUlT.—Gloucester, Aug. 19.
CROWN SlDE.—(Before Mr. Sergeant ATCUERLIT.)
This morning having been specially appointed for the
disposal of the charges of rapes and unnatural offences
comprised in the calendar, they were accordingly taken
at the sitting of the Court, and as they were more than
usually numerous, they occupied nearly the whole of
the day.
Samuel Pates was indicted for an unnatural crime,
committed with a mare at Charlton Kings, on the 4th of
July last.
Mr. Skinner prosecuted ; Mr. Cooke defended the
prisoner.
The evidence was incomplete, and the accused was
accordingly acquitted.
Robert Crook was indicted for a similar offence, corn•
mitted on the 6th of May last, at Bourton-on-the-hill, in
this county.
Mr. Skinner prosecuted ; Mr. Iluddleston defended.
The details of this horrible case do not, of course,
admit of recapitulation ; suffice it to say, that it ter-
minated in a conviction, and that sentence of death was
immediately recorded.
_ .

The above two cases, and the investigation of a charge
of rape, occupied the time of the Court during the whole
day. There still remain six similar cases, which will be
taken to-morrow.