
    14056.
    Holton v. The State.
    Decided January 11, 1923.
    Indictment for manufacture of liquor; from Treutlen superior court — Judge Graham. November 4, 1922.
    
      George B. Davis, W. J. Wallace, for plaintiff in error.
    
      M. H. Boyer, solicitor-general, Saffold & Stallings, contra.
   Broyles, C. J.

1. Under repeated rulings of the Supreme Court and of this court a ground of a motion for a new trial, complaining of the admission of documentary evidence, cannot be considered, where the documentary evidence is not set forth in -the ground nor attached as an exhibit thereto. This ruling disposes of the first ground of the amendment to the motion for a new trial.

2. The verdict was authorized by the evidence, the alleged newly discovered evidence is-merely impeaching in its character, and the court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Luhe and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.  