
    The State vs. Bradshaw.
    OrIminal Law. Giving spirituous liquors to slaves. To convict one charged with giving spirituous liquors to a slave, in violation of the Act of 18S2, eb. líé, § 10, it must be both averred and proved that the defendant was at the time, a grocer or retailer of spirituous liquors.
    The • defendant was presented by tbe grand jury of 'Gibson county, for giving spirituous liquors to a slave. At tbe July Term of the circuit court for that county. Fitzgerald, Judge, presiding, tlie presentment was quashed, and tbe Attorney General, in bebalf of tbe State, appealed in error.
    AttoeNEy General, for tbe State.
   Totten, J’.,

delivered tbe opinion of tbe court.

This is a presentment for givmg spirituous liquors to a slave, without the consent of tbe owner, or other person having the lawful control thereof, in writing; Act 1862, ch. 174, § 10.

The prohibition is limited to a any grocer or retailer ” of spirituous or vinous liquors. It must, therefore, be averred and proved that the defendant was, at the time, such grocer or retailer; for the same act is not an offense in any other person. It is made an abuse of the licensed tippling privilege by a former statute to sell; by the present to give; spirituous or vinous liquors to a slave, without the consent, in writing, of the owner, &c.

Now, in the present case, it is not averred in the presentment, that defendant was such grocer or retailer. It is, therefore, bad, and was properly quashed by his honor, the circuit judge.

.Let the judgment be affirmed.  