Lillie M- Hartig versus Fred J Hartig. pla'nUlf claims that they were mar -rted in Coquille March 20, 1920, that the defendant deserted her July 9. 1928, while she was m poor health and has not contributed to her support since She asserts that he refused to pay the household expenses or buy the plain -I tiffs clothing when they lived to-! gcther Mrs. Hartig claims that prior I to her marriage she was the owner of 208 acres In section 12 near the mouth of South Tenmile creek having added through her own efforts to her holdings in the same locale in section 12 and 86, and in the section 96 which adjoins Band on on the south. ^She asserts that defendant is not entitled to any internt in this property and she asks a decree and sole ownersh.p of the realty The complaint was filed Mon-