By B. S., с. 60, § 4, a libel for divorce may be inserted in a writ of attachment and served by summons аnd copy.
By c. 81, § 91, “ the time when a writ is actually made, with an intention of service, shall be deemed the commencement of the suit.” A suit must be regarded as pending frоm its first institution, until its final termination. Brown v. Foss, 16 Maine, 257. The making of the writ is to be deemed the commеncement of the action or process. Bunker v. Shed,
By B. S., c. 107, § 3, any suit, libel or other prоcess is to be regarded as pending when, and after, service has been made on the respondent so far as relates to the taking of depositions.
The libel having been served on the libellee, there was a suit pending for divorce from the bond of matrimony. The parties could no longer live with propriety or legally in matrimonial cohabitation. The wife must be supported. The duty to suрport her devolves on the husband. By the fact of marriage she is entitled to аlimony p>endente lite. By the terms of the order it usually commences from the return of the citation. Such, in England, is held the true rule, “ for, till then, the wife may be considered as able to obtain subsistence on the credit of her husband.” Loveden v. Loveden, 1 Phillim. 208. When, however, the husband dоes not use due diligence in causing the return of the citation to be made, the alimony may commence from the date of the citation. Nor does thе fact that there is a plea to the jurisdiction affect the power оf the court to allot alimony pendente lite. Ronalds v. Ronalds, 2 L. R., Prob. & Div. 259.
By B. S., c. 60, § 6, this court is authorized, pending a libel, to order the husband to pay the wife a suitable sum for her defense, or to enable hеr to prosecute her libel and for her separate support, etc., “ and to enforce obedience by appropriate processes.” By the Act of 1878, c. 25, the order provided by c. 60, § 6, may be issued in vacation.
Service having been made of the libel and the same being then pending, though before the return day of the writ, the libellant petitioned a justice of this court to issuе an order requiring the libellee to pay a sum of money, such as the court should decree for
The decree was one authorized by statute to be made, the justice issuing the decree having jurisdiction.
The libellee made payments under this order for the space of nine weeks, and then refused to make further payment. At the January term of this court notice was issued to the libellee to show сause why he should not be adjudged to be in contempt for not complying with the previous order of the court. Newcomb v. Newcomb,
The libellee attempted to purge himself from contempt by showing a pecuniary inability to comply with the order of cоurt, but on a full hearing the presiding justice adjudged him of sufficient ability. This adjudication is cоnclusive and binding upon the parties. Call v. Call, 65 Maine, 407. Sparhawk v. Sparhawk,
The libellee was then adjudged in contempt and ordered to be committed until he should comply with the order of court. This hаs been held to be the proper course in such case. Dwelly v. Dwelly, 16 Maine, 377. Slade v. Slade,
Undoubtedly, execution may issue in the usual form against the husband for alimony decreеd the wife. Prescott v. Prescott, 62 Maine, 429. Slade v. Slade,
Exceptions overruled.