Several witnesses having sworn positively that they purchased whisky from the defendant in Laurens county at various times covered by the special presentment charging him with illegally selling intoxicating liquor, this court can not do otherwise than hold that the trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial, based solely upon the usual general grounds.
Judgment affirmed.
Broyles, O. J., and Guerry, J., concur.