Anderson

This appeal is taken by the defendant from a judgment against her by which plaintiff was granted an interlocutory decree of divorce.

Appellant devotes much space in her brief to the cases expressing the general attitude- of courts with reference to divorce actions. There is no dispute about what this attitude is and it is beyond controversy that the policy of the law, as expressed by appellant, is to conserve the stability of the marriage relation and to grant no divorce except upon clear proof, adequately .corroborated, of facts specified by the code as grounds for divorce. However, we find no violation of these principles in the present record. The complaint charged the defendant with having an uncontrollable temper, with constant “quarreling, almost continually from the date of the marriage (Dee. 6, 1916), to June 21, 1918. He also charged that she had falsely accused him of improper relations with a “German woman”; that she had stated to divers persons that she was going to “put plaintiff out of business”; that defendant had interfered with plaintiff’s business by calling at his office and insisting upon reading all his business letters; that she had accused him of being “so…