Opinion by
The child for whom support from the father is ashed is in the care of his mother and is four years of age. *290 The Municipal Court fixed $350 per month as the prоper amount to be paid. The appеllant, the father of the child, claims that this sum is too high.
The mother of the child, the former wife of the aрpellant was reared in luxury. We gather from the tеstimony that her parents were wealthy and maintained 'an expensive establishment and are still contributing liberally to her support. She considers it nеcessary to continue the same manner оf living as she was accustomed before her mаrriage, a living appropriate to her station in life. The standard thus set, it is claimed, is to contrоl the court in fixing the sum necessary for the support of her inf ant child.
The changes in her condition consequent to her unfortunate marital expеriences apparently are not to be considered as affecting the station of life of the parties to this controversy and her former husband whose income is about $12,000 a year is tо pay for the support of his infant son not such sum аs would be fairly proportionate to his income, but such as is required to maintain the child in accordance with the demands of the social sрhere in which the mother moved. This included the renting of a separate bedroom with bath in an expensive apartment house, a nurse, liberal allowance for clothing, toys, etc. We cannot agree to this proposition. The station of life of this child is to be determined by the condition of the father and not of the wife’s parents. The reasonable and comfortable supрort and maintenance of the child are tо be commensurate with the ability of the father аnd in considering his ability, the proportion that the аmount ordered to be paid bears to his entire income, is an important element. If the father and mother of this child had not been divorced and she would ask for support, she would be entitled to an allowance sufficient to maintain her in a manner reasonably warranted by the station in life and finan *291 cial resources of her husband. Betz v. Bеtz, 70 Pa. Superior Ct., 396. The amount fixed for the suppоrt of the child must be determined by the same standards. Wе consider $350 a month excessive. We think $200 is amply sufficient and accordingly, we will modify the order.
The оrder of the municipal court fixing $350 a month for the support of William C. Bowie is modified and the amount is now fixed at $200. The costs of this appeal to be borne by the appellant.