[480] Act of Jan. 23: Acts (1860), 318-20.
[481] Act of Dec. 22, 1885: Laws (1885-86), 120.
[482] Act of Feb. 24: Laws (1891), 42; also in Ann. Codes and Stat. of Wash. (1897), II, 1595-1600.
[483] Const. of 1889, Art. IV, secs. 5, 6.
[484] On cruelty see Powelson v. Powelson, 22 Cal., 358; Morris v. Morris, 14 Cal., 76; Kelly v. Kelly, 1 West Coast Rep., 143; Eidenmuller v. Eidenmuller, 37 Cal., 394; Johnson v. Johnson, 14 Cal., 459; Pierce v. Pierce, 15 Am. Dec., 210, note. In general Poore v. Poore, 29 Am. Dec., 664.
[485] Sec. 96 of the "Civil Code" also declares that "persistent refusal to have reasonable matrimonial intercourse as husband and wife, when health or physical condition does not make such refusal reasonably necessary, or the refusal of either party to dwell in the same house with the other party, when there is no just cause for such refusal, is desertion."—Deering, Codes and Stat. (1886), II, 34; Pomeroy, Civil Code (1901), 48.
On desertion see especially Hardenberg v. Hardenberg, 14 Cal., 654; Benkert v. Benkert, 32 Cal., 467; Morrison v. Morrison, 20 Cal., 431; Christie v. Christie, 53 Cal., 26; also Stein v. Stein, 5 Col., 55; Pilgrim v. Pilgrim, 57 Iowa, 370.
[486] For interpretation of the law regarding neglect to provide see Devoe v. Devoe, 51 Cal., 543; Washburn v. Washburn, 9 Cal., 475; Rycraft v. Rycraft, 42 Cal., 444.
[487] On habitual intemperance consult Mahone v. Mahone, 19 Cal., 626, 629; Haskell v. Haskell, 54 Cal., 262.
[488] Deering, Codes and Stat. of Cal. (1886), III, 31. The development of the law of California regarding divorce, as given in the text, may be traced in Stat. (1851), 186, 187; ibid. (1853), 70; Comp. Laws (1853), 371, 372; act of March 12, 1870: in Stat. (1869-70), 291; act of March 30, 1874: in Acts Amendatory of the Codes, 181-91; Pomeroy, Civil Code (1901), 40-62.