The accused was convicted of manufacturing intoxicating liquors. The evidence would have authorized a finding that he was guilty of an attempt to manufacture such liquors, but it did not authorize the verdict returned. It was not shown that any whisky had been made at the “still” in question, or that the “beer” found there by the officers was intoxicating. The refusal to grant a new trial was error.
Judgment reversed.
Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.