
    Monroe Edwards v. The State.
    No. 9184.
    Delivered June 10, 1925.
    Manufacturing Intoxicating Liquor — Evidence Sufficient.
    No errors complained of are disclosed in the record, the evidence seems amply sufficient, and the cause is affirmed.
    Appeal from the District Court of Milam County. Tried below before the Hon. John Watson, Judge.
    Appeal from a conviction for manufacturing intoxicating liquor; penalty, one year in the penitentiary.
    The opinion states the case.
    Ho biief filed by appellant.
    
      Tom Garrard, State’s Attorney, and Grover C. Morris, Assistant State’s Attorney, for the State.
   LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction in District Court of Milam County of manufacturing intoxicating liquor; punishment, one year in the penitentiary.

No bill of exceptions was reserved to anything occurring during the trial. What purports to be an exception to the court’s charge contains no certificate showing that it was ever presented. ' The matter embraced therein is of no merit, even if same had been presented.

A recital of the facts would be of no value. Officers found appellant and one Jacobs apparently engaged in the manufacture of liquor. The operations, apparatus, etc., are fully described in the testimony. Appellant testified, asserting that he went to the place where the still was to get some whiskey but that he had no connection with it. The evidence seems amply sufficient.

The judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.  