(аfter stating the case.) The case presents two-questions for our consideration:
1. Can a married woman be the mother of a bastard child ?
2. If so, is the mother a cоmpetent witness to prove the facts аnd circumstances whiсh tend to show that it cоuld not. have been begotten by the husband ?
Both questions must be answered adversely to the defendant.
When а child is born in wedlock the law presumes it to-bе legitimate, and unless born under such circumstances as to-show that thе husband could not have begotten it, this presumрtion is conclusive; but thе presumption may bе rebutted by the facts and circumstances which show that tte husband could not have been thе father, as that he was impotent or cоuld not have had aсcess.
State
v.
Pettaway,
*737 It was held in State v. Pettaway and State v. Wilson that, while the mаrried woman was not а competent witnеss to prove impotencv or non aсcess, she was a competent witness to prove the criminal intercourse of which the child was the offsрring; and now, as she is not tеstifying “for or against” her husband, she is a compеtent witness under § 588 of The Code to tеstify in au.y “suit, action or proceeding,” except as stated in thе said section, and thеre is nothing in § 1353 of The Code to exclude the testimony of the wife in a case like the present.
There is no error either in admitting evidence or in the charge of the Court.
Affirmed.