Page: 51↓
A girl refused the benefit of the poor's roll to enable her to advocate an action of filiation and aliment which had been decided against her in the Sheriff Court.
The petitioner was pursuer of an action of filiation and aliment in the Sheriff Court of Haddington. which had been decided in her favour by the Sheriff-Substitute, and against her by the Sheriff-Depute. She proposed to advocate the Sheriff's judgment on juratory caution, and applied for the benefit of the poor's roll. A remit was made to the reporters, who certified that the applicant had a probabilis causa litigandi. The defender objected to the petitioner being admitted to the poor's roll. It was a case betwixt two farm servants, which had already been considered by two local Judges, and
Page: 52↓
the parties should not be encouraged to continue the litigation. Duncan v. Morrison, 16th January 1863 ( 1 Macph. 257), was in point. It was stated that the petitioner was twenty-two years of age and unmarried, had one child, earned elevenpence a day, and neither she nor her parents had any property of any description.
The Court refused the application.
Counsel for Petitioner— Mr C. T. Couper. Agent — Mr R. C. Bell, W.S.
Counsel for Defender— Mr Millar.