
    Commonwealth vs. Dennis Regan.
    Upon the trial of an indictment for rape, it is not competent for the defendant to show, either by cross-examination of the woman, or by other evidence, that she has declared herself pregnant by other men.
    Indictment for rape. At the trial in the superior court, in Suffolk, before Putnam, J., Julia O’Shae, the woman upon whose person the act was committed, testified as a witness for the Commonwealth ; and was asked, in cross-examination, whether. she ever had sexual intercourse with any other man than the defendant, and whether, at a time specified in the question as the time when she lived with the Widow Wadman, she did not declare that she was pregnant and name two persons “ as having been instrumental ” in making her so. The defendant’s counsel stated that he proposed to show, by this cross-examination, that the witness declared that she was pregnant and named two persons as father of the child, but that in fact she was not pregnant, Upon objection by the attorney for the Commonwealth, the judge excluded the question, and also excluded independent evidence offered by the defendant, in his defence, to establish such facts. The jury returned a verdict of guilty, and the defendant alleged exceptions.
    
      C. H. Hudson & E. W. Sanborn, for the defendant.
    C. Allen, Attorney General, (J. C. Davis, Assistant Attorney General, with him,) for the Commonwealth.
   By the Court.

The evidence offered as to particular acts, and the questions put to the witness, were inadmissible.

Hxeeptions overruled.  