The Sun.
London, England, 1838-02-12 00:00:00

MISCELLANEOUS.

4,810 Edin. and Glas. Un. Canal 50/, sh. all pd 2^./.
Ditto Allocated MI. eh. all pd 641.
5,400 5 per cent. Edinb. Joint Steck WaLer 95/, sh. all pd 341.
Carron Iron Company 2501. sh. all pd 4.5 L
~meth IS per cent. Shotts Iron kounuery 501. sh 38/, pd 431,
i() nr,o 3 per cent. Edinburgh SL Leith Glass 2Ol. sh. 16/, pd Bfl.
4,500 10 per cent. Edinburgh Coal Gas 251. sh. all pd 5:4
4'450 10 per cent. Glasgow Gas ',51. sh. all pd 611
750 ii Per cent. Leith Coal Gas 20/.Bh. all pd 45/.
1,206 Edinburgh ,nd Dalkeith Ital'way...sol. sh 501.
2,000 - 5 per cent. Equitable Loan Company "51. ob. W. pd 101.

LAW INTELLIGENCE.

COURT OF CHANCERY, FEB. 10.
COSTA V. ALBERTAZZL

This was an appeal from a decision of the Vice-Chancellor,
overruling the defendant's demurrer and refusing him leave to
amend. The bill was filed by a music master against the de-
fendant and his wife, Madame Albertazzi, of the Italian Opera,
and it prayed a discovery of the profits made by Madame Al-
bertazzi by her professional exertions in England and on the
Continent since 1828. In that year Madame, then a Miss
Howson, entered into a contract with Costa, by which he was
to give the lady such musical instruction as would qualify her
to become a professional singer; and she was, for the period
of eight years, to give him a moiety of the profits of her la-
bours, and if she went abroad in the course of the eight years
then the time was to be calculated from her return, passing
over the period of her absence. Miss Howson, at the age of
twelve years and nine months, married Albertazzi, and in 1831
she went abroad, remained there till 1836, when she returned,
and entered into a lucrative engagement with Laporte at the
Opera House, singing also at many private concerts. Of
the profits derived from these concerts and of her engagement
at the Opera the plaintiff claimed his moiety, according to the
contract ; but the defendant alleging that the eight years were
to be computed without any interval insisted that the contract
was at an end, and refused to account. Having answered a
part of the bill, end demurred to a part, the Vice-Chancellor
held that the demurrer was incurably bad, the defendant hav-
ing demurred to and answered the same part of the bill.
Mr. WIGRAM in support of tha appeal, contended that the
demurrer was a mere slip of the pleader.
The Loan CHANCELLOR, after hearing Mr. Wilcock on the
other side, said there could be no doubt that the demurrer was
bad. All that could he done under the circumstances wls to
allow the defendants, upon payment of costs, to correct the er-
ror into which he alleged he had fallen by mistake, but without
allowing him to extend the dcmumrer, unless open to all the
objections that might be afterward,; taken against it.

VICE-CIIANCELLOR' S COURT, FFE. 10.
UTTERMERE V. WILLIAMS.
Mr. KNIGHT BRUCE stated that the object of this suit was
to carry into effect a trust for sale of some copyhold tenements,
for the payment of incumbrancers. The case was opened as
ono in which a decree for a sale and a reference as to priority
of incumbrancers was of course. Sir C. WF.THERELL appeared
for two of the defendants, the son and the eldest daughter of
Williams, the original owner of the copyholds, who defended
the suit as paupers. The Learned Counsel contended that
the deed which created the trust for sale was a fraud upon his
clients and the other children of Williams.

Mr WALES, for the two children, excluded under the ap-
pointment, did not object to a sale, provided the proceeds of
Lisseys were kept separate.
His lIoNouK said, the security was good against the chil-
dren ; and the usual decree for a sale was made.