
    Fincannon v. The State.
    Since the passage of the act of December 24th, 1890 (Acts of 1890-91, vol. 1, p. 128), rendering it unlawful to sell spirituous liquors-in any quantity whatever without first obtaining a license, the phrase “dealers in spirituous liquors,” when used in a statute, comprehends all persons who sell such liquors in any quantity. Consequently, the 15th clause of the second section of the general tax act of 1892 is to be construed as imposing the tax therein specified upon dealers who sell by wholesale in the original packages corn whisky of their own manufacture in this State, the same as upon other dealers in such liquors.
    December 18, 1893.
    Indictment for misdemeanor. Before Judge Harris. Coweta superior court. September term, 1893.
    Atkinson & Hall, for plaintiff in error. T. A. Atkinson, solicitor-general, and J. M. Terrell, contra.
    
   Judgment affirmed.

The plaintiff in error was indicted for failing to register with the ordinary of Coweta county, and to pay the special tax required by law of a dealer in spirituous- and malt liquors. The court charged the'jury that,, under the facts agreed on, the defendant was a dealer-under the statute, and as such was guilty. A new trial was moved for and denied, and the defendant excepted. The agreed facts are: “ Defendant has given bond as-required of distillers by H. S. law; sells only distilled liquors of his own production, at the place of manufacture, in the original packages, to which tax stamps are fixed; sells from government warehouse only, and has no place of business for carrying on business of a dealer-in spirituous liquors, but sells to various dealers directly from his distillery; delivers it at depot or place of business of local dealers; sells only in original packages of ten gallons and upward; distillery in Coweta county; has. failed to register name and place of business with ordinary of Coweta county, and failed to pay tax required of dealers; whisky made of corn.”  