
    S. H. HAYES v. STATE.
    No. A-260.
    Opinion Filed November 23, 1910.
    (111 Pac. 1020.)
    1. INTOXICATING LIQUORS — Information—Language of Statute. It is permissible to charge in an information that the defendant “did unlawfully sell, barter, give away, and otherwise furnish certain intoxicating liquors, to wit, whisky.” This is substantially the language of the statute, and charges but one offense, and will sustain a verdict, upon proof that the defendant sold, bartered, or.gave away whisky.
    2. APPEAL— Review — Instructions—Necessity for Exceptions. Errors committed by the trial court in its instructions to the jury, if not fundamental, will not be ground for reversal upon appeal, unless they were duly excepted to at the trial.
    (Syllabus by the Court.)
    
      Appeal from Cleveland County Court; N. E. Sharp, Judge.
    
    S. H. Hayes was convicted of violating the prohibition law, and he 'appeals.
    Affirmed.
    
      B. F. Wolf, for appellant.
    
      Fred S. Caldwell, for the State.
   PEE OTTETAM.

First. The information, in substance, is in the language of the statute, refers to but one and the same transaction, and charges but one offense. The trial court, therefore, did not err in overruling the demurrer to the information.

Second. No exceptions were reserved to the instructions of the court to the jury. We therefore cannot consider the objection now attempted to be made to said instructions. The charge of the court is subject to criticism, but the errors therein contained are not fundamental.

The judgment of the lower court is therefore affirmed.  