178 ARTICLE 10.

Husband not entitled to divorce for premarital unchastity of his wife when
he was the first to have carnal knowledge of her. Hoff v. Hoff. 162 Md. 248.
See notes, to art. 35, sec. 4.
See notes to sec. 39.

39.

Separation and intention to abandon must concur, but need not begin at same
time, and divorce may be granted on ground of abandonment without regard
to duration. Refusal by wife of marital rights. Klein v. Klein, 146 Md. 29. And
as to refusal of marital rights, see Miller v. Miller. 153 Md. 213: McKane v.
McKane, 152 Md. 515.

No abandonment such as law recognizes as ground for divorce: resumption
of marital relations. Amount and duration of alimony; counsel fee. Daiger v.
Daiger, 154 Md. 503.

Though abandonment has not continued for three years, partial divorce may
be decreed where divorce a vinculo is prayed. Wife's continued absence caused
by offensive letters and unwillingness for reunion. Refusal to renew marital
relations. Downs v. Downs, 154 Md. 434.

Divorce a mensa may be granted for abandonment and desertion without
regard to its duration; elements necessary to constitute abandonment are cohab-
itation ended and intention to desert. Alimonv ; counsel fees. Miller v. Miller,
153 Md. 217.

Decree awarding permanent alimony does not preclude wife from securing
divorce a mensa, by subsequent suit where separation of parties has continued.
Injunction against disposing of property. Mann v. Mann, 144 Md. 523.

Common law obligates father to support child during minority, which con-
tinues after divorce unless otherwise decreed. Obligation ceases on death of
father; estate not liable. Powers of court re support of children not broader
than re alimony. Blades v. Szatai, 151 Md. 646. (And see dissenting opinion.)

Separation agreement of husband and wife does not discharge, either froni
obligation to support child. Court may order who shall have custody of child
and be charged with maintenance. Melson v. Melson. 351 Md. 206.

Cursing and use of vile epithets does not constitute excessively vicious con-
duct or cruelty. McKane v. McKane, 152 Md. 515.

Meaning of "cruelty" under this section; technical word. Adultery. Alimony.
Wendel v. Wendel, 154 Md. 21. And see Proudfoot v. Proudfoot 154 Md. 586.

Evidence of cruelty sufficient to justify divorce a mensa. Schwab v. Schwab,
144 Md. 49.

Husband who left his wife and lived with children of former marriage held,
under testimony and circumstances, to have left wife with intention of desert-
ing her. Schwartz v. Schwartz, 158 Md. 80.

In suit by wife for permanent alimony, the husband flies cross-bill for
divorce, the court can determine custody and support of infant children
whether divorce is granted or not. Simmont v. Simmont. 160 Md. 422. -

Refusal of husband to return to home with wife, with letter and personal
interview declaring his intention to end all relations between them, held to
justify divorce a mensa for abandonment. Juergens v. Juergens. 160 Md. 532.

Cited but not construed in Bushman v. Bushman. 157 Md. 171: Kriedo v
Kriedo, 159 Md. 234: Wald v. Wald, 161 Md. 502.

See notes to art. 35, sec. 4.

1931, ch. 220.

39A. Any deed or agreement made between husband and wife respect-
ing support, maintenance, property rights, or personal rights, or any settle-
ment made in lieu of support, maintenance, property rights or personal
rights shall be valid, binding and enforceable to every intent and purpose,
and such deed or agreement shall not be a bar to an action for divorce,
either a vinculo matrimonii or a mensa et thoro, as the case may be,
whether the cause for divorce existed at the time or arose prior or subse-
quent to the time of the execution of said deed or agreement, or whether at