1. Defendant's consistent indulgence of the petitioner's caprices brought about a situation which threw on him the burden of making reasonable advances to effect a reconciliation after he had been excluded from her bedroom and had never thereafter approached her. His conduct in remaining aloof and apart contributed to her desertion, and the duty to make such advances or concessions to his wife as might reasonably be expected to induce her to resume marital relations was cast on him.
2. Since it was the petitioner in the first place who withdrew herself from the conjugal bed, her suit must fail on the ground that she is guilty of abandonment. The defendant must fail on his counter-claim because of failure to make just advances.
3. Petitioner's motion for counsel fees denied. Defendant's counter-claim imposed no greater burden than his answer would have done, since the charge against her was desertion, based on the same facts on which she seeks a limited divorce.
PER CURIAM.
The decree under review will be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Advisory Master Herr.
For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, LLOYD, CASE, BODINE, DONGES, HEHER, PERSKIE, VAN BUSKIRK, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, JJ. 14.
For reversal — None.