
    MAES v. UNITED STATES.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    February 21, 1923.)
    No. 2037.
    Intoxicating liquors <S=s>230(6l/2)— Evidence held to sustain conviction for possessing.
    Evidence that defendant kept and sold for beverage purposes fruit extracts, which were intoxicating, held sufficient to sustain a conviction of possessing intoxicating liquors, in violation of the National Prohibition Act.
    <®s»For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in ail Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes-
    In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of South Carolina, at Charleston; Henry A. M. Smith, Judge.
    Oscar Maes was convicted of possessing intoxicating liquors, and he brings error.
    Affirmed.
    George F. Von Kolnitz, of Charleston, S. C., for plaintiff in error.
    Louis M. Shimel, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Charleston, S. C. (J. D. E. Meyer, U. S. Atty., of Charleston, S. C., on the brief), for the United States.
    Before WOODS and WADDILL, Circuit Judges, and ROSE, then District Judge.
   ROSE, Circuit Judge.

The plaintiff in error was the defendant below and will be so styled herein. He was convicted of having possession of intoxicating liquors in violation of the National Prohibition Act (41 Stat. 305). The testimony offered on behalf of the government was,: if believed by the jury, amply sufficient to sustain the verdict. The-liquor in question consisted of various kinds of fruit extracts. There is direct evidence that the defendant kept them and sold them for beverage purpose, and that they were in fact intoxicating. The case ap-: pears to have been fairly tried and properly submitted to the jury. We have examined the various assignments of error and find no merit in any of them.

Affirmed.  