
    Susannah Bursler versus John Bursler.
    Alimony allowed without regard to the husbaud’s income alone, the illness of the wife requiring extraordinary expenses.
    Upon a petition for an increase of alimony, it appeared that the parties were divorced a mensa et thoro in 1826, on the application of the wife, and 30 dollars a year allowed as alimony ; that she was now afflicted with a disease which rendered her unable to labor for her support, and occasioned extraordinary expenses to nearly the whole amount of the alimony; that her children were not able to support her, although they had contributed for that purpose ; that in the opinion of her physician she could not live longer than a year; that the husband’s real estate was worth about 2100 dollars, and his personal 300, and that his debts amounted to about 600 ; and that his income from the real estate was about 42 dollars, and from his labor about as much more.
    The Court said that this was not like common cases of alimony ; that the situation of the petitioner required extraordinary expenses, and if the parties had not been divorced, the respondent would have been morally obliged to spend more than his income, and to sell part of his real estate, to pay those expenses, and his improper conduct ought not to excuse him from doing what by his marriage contract it would have been his duty to perform. The Court therefore increased the allowance to 60 dollars a year.
    
    Costs for the petitioner.
    
    
      
       See Revised Stat. c. 76, § 31, 36.
    
    
      
       See Revised Stat. c. 76, § 37.
    
     