The duty of parents to provide for the maintenance of their children is a principle of natural law, and it is a duty which the municipal law of all well regulated nations have taken care to enforce. It is held by some courts that this duty is a mere moral obligation and is not enforceable in law independently of statutory provision on the subject,3 but by the weight of authority, it is held that by the common law, the father is legally bound to support his minor children, if able to do so, even though they may have property of their own.4 The property of the parent does not excuse him from the duty to support his children. A child may forfeit his right to be supported by his father by improperly leaving his father's house or refusing to obey his father. A father is not liable for the support of a child who is improperly living with his mother apart from the father.

The duty to support the children rests primarily upon the father but in case of his death or inability it falls upon the mother.5

The divorce of the parents of a child does not affect the duty of either parent as to the support of the child. The question as to the custody and support of the children of the marriage is, however, generally settled in the decree of the divorce. A grandparent is under no legal duty to support his grandchildren. A step-father is ordinarily not liable for the support of his step-children,6 but after he receives such child into his home as a member of his family he becomes liable for his support.7

3 Kelley vs. Davis, 49 N. H., 187, 6 Am. Rep., 499.

4 Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law. Vol.

XXI, p. 1049; Ganner vs. Skinner, 71 Bush. ( K. Y.), 120; Gilley vs. Gilley, 79 Me., 292, 1 Am. St. Rep., 307; Perkins vs. Westcoat, 3 Colo. App., 338

5 Wing vs. Hibbert, 8 Ohio Dec,

65; Elliott vs. Gibbons, 30 Bart. (N. Y.), 498.

6 Johnson vs. Onstead, 74 Mich.,

437; Cook vs. Bennett, 51 N. H., 85.