“There seems to be some inconsistency in the decisions of the Court as to the circumstances in which an oath in supplement should be admitted in such questions as the present; and as the Lord Ordinary cannot altogether acquiesce in the decision lately given in the First Division of the Court, and referred to in the representation, * his opinion being the same with that which was given by Lord President Blair in the case of Craig, he has sent this case to the Court in the least expensive form he could think of. In this case it appears to the Lord Ordinary, that the evidence of a carnal intercourse between the parties, at a date long prior to the begetting of the child in question, (even though it were more unexceptionable than it is,) ought not to be held per se as a semiplena probatio; and that the pursuer's general habits and conduct, as stated by herself, and particularly her having attempted, as she alleges, to procure abortion, are such as ought to induce the Court, with great reluctance, to admit her oath in supplement.”