husband to provide for his wife the common necessaries of life, he having the ability to do so; or his failure to provide as the result of "idleness, profligacy, or dissipation."[486] Finally, habitual intemperance is described as "that degree of intemperance from the use of intoxicating drinks which disqualifies the person a great portion of the time from properly attending to business, or which would reasonably inflict a cause of great mental anguish" upon the innocent person.[487] In like spirit the reasons for denying a decree are minutely specified by the law. Original jurisdiction in all questions of divorce and annulment of marriage is now vested in the superior courts in their respective counties or other districts.[488] [484] On cruelty see Powelson _v._ Powelson, 22 _Cal._, 358; Morris _v._ Morris, 14 _Cal._, 76; Kelly _v._ Kelly, 1 _West Coast Rep._, 143; Eidenmuller _v._ Eidenmuller, 37 _Cal._, 394; Johnson _v._ Johnson, 14 _Cal._, 459; Pierce _v._ Pierce, 15 _Am. Dec._, 210, note. In general Poore _v._ Poore, 29 _Am. Dec._, 664. [485] Sec. 96 of the "Civil Code" also declares that "persistent refusal to have reasonable matrimonial intercourse as husband and wife, when health or physical condition does not make such refusal reasonably necessary, or the refusal of either party to dwell in the same house with the other party, when there is no just cause for such refusal, is desertion."--DEERING, _Codes and Stat._ (1886), II, 34; POMEROY, _Civil Code_ (1901), 48. On desertion see especially Hardenberg _v._ Hardenberg, 14 _Cal._, 654; Benkert _v._ Benkert, 32 _Cal._, 467; Morrison _v._ Morrison, 20 _Cal._, 431; Christie _v._ Christie, 53 _Cal._, 26; also Stein _v._ Stein, 5 _Col._, 55; Pilgrim _v._ Pilgrim, 57 _Iowa_, 370. [486] For interpretation of the law regarding neglect to provide see Devoe _v._ Devoe, 51 _Cal._, 543; Washburn _v._ Washburn, 9 _Cal._, 475; Rycraft _v._ Rycraft, 42 _Cal._, 444. [487] On habitual intemperance consult Mahone _v._ Mahone, 19 _Cal._, 626, 629; Haskell _v._ Haskell, 54 _Cal._, 262. [488] DEERING, _Codes and Stat. of Cal._ (1886), III, 31. The development of the law of California regarding divorce, as given in the text, may be traced in _Stat._ (1851), 186, 187; _ibid._ (1853), 70; _Comp. Laws_ (1853), 371, 372; act of March 12, 1870: in _Stat._ (1869-70), 291; act of March 30, 1874: in _Acts Amendatory of the Codes_, 181-91; POMEROY, _Civil Code_ (1901), 40-62.