
    STATE v. CLARK SMITH.
    
      Evidence. Intoxicating Liquor.
    
    When one is on trial for having illegally sold intoxicating liquor, it is in the discretion of the court, to allow offences specified to he proved hy other witnesses than those named in the specifications.
    Information charging the respondent with illegally selling intoxicating liquor. Plea, not guilty; trial by jury, March Term, 1882, Veazey, J., presiding. Verdict, guilty. The case is stated in the opinion.
    
      John Howe, for the State.
    
      Gr. M. Fuller and It. 0. Abell, for the respondent.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Rowell, J.

The government was allowed to prove, not offences other than those specified, but those specified by witness other than those named in the specifications. This was matter of discretion and not revisable.

The respondent takes nothing by his exceptions.  