If this were a case of first impression, I would be inclined to hold that Chapter 8478 of the Acts of 1921 changed the common-law rule as announced in Porter v. Porter,60 Fla. 407, 53 So. 546, but this question, which I recognize was not free from difficulty, was settled by the Hopkins case, above cited, and I therefore concur with the other members of the Court in adherence to the construction of the Act which this Court heretofore has enunciated in the Hopkins case.