The defendant was convicted of the offense of manufacturing liquor. The evidence relied upon by the State was wholly circumstantial and was not sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis save that of the defendant’s guilt. It was therefore error to overrule the motion for a new trial.
Judgment reversed.
Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. W. E. Spinks, for plaintiff in error. J. R. Hutcheson, solicitor-general, contra.