Andrews v. State

1. The testimony as to the manner in which the “number game” (lottery) was operated was properly admitted, although the witnesses may have stated that they had no actual experience but had obtained their information from others. Crawford v. State, 49 Ga. App. 801 (3) (176 S. E. 92). A “number game” has been fully described in Cutcliff v. State, 51 Ga. App. 40 (179 S. E. 568), and other eases. See also Moore v. State, 54 Ga. App. 218, 220 (187 S. E. 595). And we do not deem it necessary to state at length the evidence describing it in the instant case.

2. The paper ribbons which the State’s…