
    STATE v. CHAFUS WHISNANT and REUBEN WHISNANT.
    (Filed 16 May, 1923.)
    Evidence — Nonsuit—Trials.
    The evidence on the trial of this action for violating the prohibition law is held sufficient to sustain a conviction, and warrant the refusal of defendants’ motion to dismiss the action.
    Appeal by defendants from Bryson, J., at September Term, 1922, of POLK.
    The defendants were convicted of a violation of the prohibition law, and from the judgment they appealed.
    
      Attorney-General Manning and Assistant Attorney-General Nash for the State.
    
    
      Quirm, Hamrick & Harris for' defendants.
    
   Pee Oueiam.

The defendants excepted to the court’s denial of their motion to dismiss the action, but the evidence was amply sufficient to sustain the verdict. The exception is without merit. S. v. Johnson, 184 N. C., 637; S. v. Jenkins, 182 N. C., 818; S. v. Killiam, 173 N. C., 792; S. v. Carlson, 171 N. C., 818.

No error.  