[Footnote 327: HANSARD, _Parl. Debates_, 3d series, CXLII, 394 ff. See the suggestive paper of HIRSCHFELD, "The Law of Divorce in England and in Germany," _Law Quart. Review_, XIII, 400-403, giving illustrative passages from the debates relating to the unfair treatment of the wife.] [Footnote 328: HANSARD, _op. cit._, 3d series, CXLVII, 1545.] In judicial practice, however, the terms "cruelty" and "desertion" have acquired a rather broad meaning.[329] In particular through the doctrine of "constructive" and "moral" cruelty there is a "strong tendency to equalize the positions of the two" sexes.[330] Nevertheless, the woman is still in a relatively unfavorable position; and the sphere of divorce _a vinculo_ is exceedingly narrow. There are doubtless many other causes besides infidelity for which the welfare of society and the happiness of individuals require that marriage may be dissolved. "It is a scandal to English legislation," observes Lecky, that divorce "should not be granted when one of the partners has been condemned for some grave criminal offence involving a long period of imprisonment or penal servitude, or for wilful and prolonged desertion, or for cruelty, however atrocious, if it is not coupled with adultery. In all continental legislations which admit divorce a catalogue of grave causes is admitted which justify it."[331] [Footnote 329: Thus adultery, if long persisted in, ripens into "desertion." For a detailed discussion of "cruelty" and "desertion" according to definition and judicial precedent, and particularly on "constructive" and "moral" cruelty, see GEARY, _op. cit._, 323 ff., 330 ff. _Cf._ BISHOP, _Marriage, Divorce, and Separation_, I, §§ 1524 ff., especially 1532; HARRISON, _op. cit._, 138 ff.]