3138 ARTICLE 101.

A husband or wife of an injured employee, who has deserted said em-
ployee for more than one year prior to the time of the injury or subse-
quently shall not be a beneficiary under this Article.

The reference to remarriage of a dependent widow without dependent children
applies where there are no dependent children at time of such remarriage. The
case of marriage of a dependent sister, distinguished. Giggndelle v. Piedmont &
George's Creek Coal Co., 137 Md. 26.

This section referred to in holding that order of commission denying a motion to
reopen a case is appealable. Bethlehem Corp. v. Simmons, 132 Md. 508.

This section referred to in construing sec. 36—see notes thereto. Accident Fund v
Jabobs' Admr., 140 Md. 626.
See notes to secs. 42 and 54.

An. Code, sec. 44. 1914, ch. 800, sec. 43. 1920, ch. 456, sec. 44.

44. If a beneficiary shall reside or remove out of the United States,
and shall have been such non-resident, for a period of one year, the Com-
mission may, in its discretion, convert any payments thereafter to become
due to such beneficiary into a lump sum payment, not in any case to exceed
twenty-four hundred dollars, by paying a sum equal to three-fourths of
the then value of such payments.

This section referred to in construing sec. 36—see notes thereto. Accident Fund v,
Jacobs' Admr., 140 Md. 626.
See notes to secs. 42 and 54.

An. Code, sec. 45. 1914, ch. 800, sec. 44.

45. If injury or death results to a workman from the deliberate inten-
tion of his employer to produce such injury or death, the employe, the
widow, widower, child, children or dependents of the employe shall have
the privilege either to take under this article or have cause of action against
such employer, as if this article had not been passed.

This section referred to in construing sec. 58—see notes thereto. Hagerstown v.
Schreiner, 135 Md. 653 (decided prior to act of 1920, ch. 456). And see Jirout v.
Gebelein, 142 Md. 698.

An. Code, sec. 46. 1914, ch. 800, sec. 45. 1916, ch. 597, sec. 46.

46. Notwithstanding anything hereinbefore or hereinafter contained,
no employee or dependent of any employee shall be entitled to receive any
compensation or benefits under this Article on account of any injury to
or death of an employee caused by self-inflicted injury, the wilful mis-
conduct, or where the injury or death resulted solely from the intoxication
of the injured employee.

The conduct of an employee in attempting to pass between cars in a car erecting
shop, though he had been warned of an impending movement, coupled with his
stopping to talk as he was crossing, held not to amount to " wilful misconduct."
Cases reviewed. Balto. Car Foundry Co. v. Ruzicka, 132 Md. 492.

Appellee's effort to board a rapidly moving automobile truck held not to consti-
tute " wilful misconduct." Beasman v. Butler, 133 Md. 387.

See notes to sec. 14.

An. Code, sec. 47. 1914, ch. 800, sec. 46.

47. If it be established that the injured employe was of such age and
experience when injured as that under the natural conditions his wages
would be expected to increase, this fact may be considered in arriving at
his average weekly wage.