
    16919.
    Smith v. The State.
    Decided January 12, 1926.
    . Conviction of sale of liquor; from city court of Summerville— Judge Neal. October 21, 1925.
    
      0. B. Rivers, for plaintiff in error.
    
      J. F. Kelly, solicitor, contra.
   Bloodworth, J.

1. Under the facts and in the light of the remainder of the charge, it was not error for the court to instruct the jury that “for anyone to take actual possession and control of intoxicating liquors of any amount is a violation of law regardless of ownership.”

2. There was evidence to support the verdict.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.  