
    CYNTHIA E. CILLEY v. JAMES CILLEY.
    
      Divorce. No. 59, Acts 0/I886.
    The fact that a husband can, hut will not work and support his wife, is nofea ground for divorce under No. 59, Acts of 1886; following Jewett v. Jewett, page 370.
    .Petition for divorce for refusal or neglect to support. Heard at the May Term, 1888, Ross, J., presiding.
    It appeared that the petitionee was a well and able-bodied young-man ; that' immediately after his marriage he went to work in the mill of one Patterson and for a time so supported his wife that he might have continued to so labor and support her had he-chosen to do so, but that some six months after his marriage-he left his work and his wife and had not since been heard! from. It did not appear that he had any means except from his personal earnings. Upon these facts the court refused, as a matter of law, to grant the prayer of the petition, and the petitioner-excepted.
    
      S. M. Pingree, for the petitioner,
    argued that this was a case-within the provisions of No. 59 of the Acts of 1886.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Yeazey, J.

This ease is controlled by the decision in Jewett v. Jewett, recently heard at the Franklin Term.

The judgment of the County Court is affirmed.  