
    13410.
    McCarty v. The State.
    Decided June 13, 1922.
    Indictment for possessing intoxicating liquor; from Wilkes superior court — Judge Shurley. January 24, 1922.
    McCarty was convicted of having possession of intoxicating liquor. It was testified by Sturdivant that at the house of Aaron Mills, who was having a barbecue, between twelve and one o’clock at night, McCarty was present with a number of other persons, and when the witness entered the house a man standing in front of McCarty was drinking out of a cup, and, on seeing the witness, he set the cup down, grabbed from McCarty’s hand a fruit jar about half full of “ some liquid that looked like liquor,” and ran off with it; and that on a table there were several cups that smelled as if whisky had been in them; that there was no whisky in them, and the witness could not swear that the jar contained whisky; that the liquid in it could have been water; that the room was lighted only by a small lamp and he could not see well; and that McCarty denied having had any whisky there at all. Another witness testified that he went into the room- a little later and that the cups had the -smell of whisky about them, but no whisky was found. The defendant, in his statement at the trial, denied that he had a fruit jar as stated by the witness. He said that another man in the room tried to sell whisky to him, but he did not buy any.
    
      Hugh E. Combs, for plaintiff in error.
    
      M. L. Felts, solicitor-general, contra.
   Luke, J.

The evidence adduced upon the trial being insufficient to authorize the defendant’s conviction, it was error to overrule his motion for a new trial.

■Judgment reversed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.  