
    Maher, Appellant, v. Maher.
    
      Divorce — Desertion—Insufficient evidence.
    
    Tbe report of a master in divorce recommending tbat tbe libel be dismissed because of insufficient evidence, which has been confirmed by tbe lower court, will be sustained on appeal where tbe report fully reviews tbe law and facts in tbe case and tbe recommendation of tbe master is warranted by tbe evidence.
    Argued October 30, 1919.
    Appeal, No. 8, Oct. T., 1918, by libellant, from decree of C. P. No. 5, of Phila. County, Sept. T., 1917, No. 76, dismissing libel in divorce in the case of John Francis Maher v. Emmy Himmelbach Maher.
    Before Orlady, P. J., Porter, Henderson, Head, Trexler and Keller, JJ.
    Affirmed.
    Libel in divorce. Before Staake, J.
    The case was referred to David Phillips, Esq., as master, who recommended that the libel be dismissed.
    On exceptions to the master’s report the court overruled the exceptions and dismissed the libel. LibeL lant appealed.
    
      Error assigned wa-s the order of the court.
    
      John G. Kaufman, of Robinson, Kaufman & Barnes, for appellant.
    
      Albert E. Peterson, for appellee.
    
      February 28, 1920:
   Per Curiam,

There is no merit in this appeal. The master carefully discharged his duty and submitted a report in which the law and the facts are very carefully considered and disposed of properly. The exceptions filed to his report were overruled and the libel dismissed by the court below.

The decree is affirmed, at the cost of the appellant.  