Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OFIHE ATTORNEY GENERAL OFTEXAS AUSTIN Honorable Winston Bmamett a0my iittortt6y Makeian County Dlokazus, %xas Eon. alnston Bruinmcstt, page 2 of li uor, is stit out in the ssoond paragraph of Art. 866-31, and Is d,aflned a8 any beverage oon- tainlng mom than one-half of one peroent of al- oohol by rolumo whioh is oapable of use GOTbever- ace purpose8, eithas alone or when diluted. *Of oourse thla *Wine Tonlo* ia supposed to be #old as a med~olac and/or something to *t&mu- tit6 an& inorease the appetite and oontaining rltanln Bl whatever that. is, the, iact that it aonta~lns vfta%in Bl is stamped on the lribel bt- taahed to each bottle. Howover, I hare Sound nothlng under the Uquor atatutes authorlz~ the, sala .bf'in alomhb~ia ,btiveragse for beverage ,puxposes in a dry oouiity. Nor have I found any- thing under ~aoyDrug +ot, a&horizing snah ~(11~. immulas j *iah w6r6 maw- and lawful. ptm not aa~beYe%agea.* The guilty intent of the se r=** eata sr, under the rspe&.ed Act, wae question of faot to be decided against him beforr\ a oonriotionnould stand. Lf the prod showed theit..#e liquid w08 sola~fo~ m&iaSnql purposes =a not eia a bevera& there eould~ be no oonvlotlon. HolXman v. State, 299 & W.~ 249. -T.- - - - r Honorable Winston Brammtt, page 3 Under tihaTexas Liquor Control Aat howovar thma la ao saoh axoeption, If one in a "dry amaR sallrr *any bereraga oontalnlng mre than one-hali of one eroant of aloohol by o&me whioh la oapabls of use for %average pur- poaaa aithar alone or whan dilutad,m he haas oomcaitted an 0% &6oler@d by the law to be unlawful. .Ths question ubather a givenalc~ohollo liquid is ca bls of belag wed aa a beverage manlfcatly 1s the quest p"on-for dstermlnatioa and is a question of foot. Th$re $8 no.marked dividing line. botwoenthoae liquids whfahare ganer&llyknowto bs for beverage purposes anathosewhloh are atrlctly medloinal or imn-beverage. It should be notload