
    The State v. Arns.
    1. Appeal: when it does not lie. In a bastardy pioeeeding, the defendant attached to his answer certain interrogatories to be answered by the mother of the child. The court sustained exceptions to the interrogatories on the ground that the mother was not a party to the action in such sense as to require her to answer them. Held that an appeal would not lie from such ruling of the court, it not being such an order as is contemplated by § 3164 of the Code. (Richards v. Burden, 31 Iowa, 305, followed in principle.)
    
      Appeal from Bremer District Oourt — Hon. Gr. W. Ruddiok, Judge.
    
    Wednesday, October 12.
    This is a proceeding in bastardy, in which the defendant is charged with the paternity of a child of which it is alleged one Mary Arns is pregnant. The defendant, by his answer, denied being the father of the child, and he attached to his answer certain interrogatories propounded to Mary Arns, and demanded that she be required to answer the same. These interrogatories related to the number of times and the place and date of the sexual intercourse by which the child was begotten. The plaintiff’s counsel filed exception to the interrogatories, one ground of which was that Mary Arns was not a party to the proceeding in such a sense as to require her to answer the interrogatories. The court sustained the exceptions upon the ground above stated, and the cause was continued to the next term of court. The defendant appeals.
    
      M. E. Billings, for appellant.
    
      W. 8. K'ingsley, for appellee.
   Rothrock, J.

An appeal from the order made in this case is not authorized by law. Section 3164 of the Code provides that an appeal may be taken from the following orders: (1) An order made affecting a substantial right in an action, when such order, in effect, determines the action, and prevents a judgment from which an appeal might be taken ; (2) a final order made in special proceedings, affecting a substantial right therein, or made on a summary application in an action after judgment * * It is apparent that the order made in this case does not come within either of the above provisions of the statute. The ruling made was a decision upon the right of the defendant to compel Mary Arns to answer questions, the answers to be used as evidence in the trial of the case. There is no appeal from rulings of this character. This was long ago determined by this court. Richards v. Burden, 31 Iowa, 305. It is unnecessary to do more than cite the case. It is in principle precisely to the point. The appeal must be

Dismissed.  