McDowell v. State

The defendant was indicted under two counts. Count 1 charged that 'the defendant manufactured whisky; count 2, unlawful possession of a still, etci When the evidence was all in, the court charged the jjiry that there was not sufficient evidence to warrant a conviction, either for‘manufacturing whisky or for possessing a still, but that under certain phases of the evidence, if they were convinced beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant might, under the first count of the indictment, be convicted of an attempt to manufacture whisky. In Mote v. State, 17 Ala. App. 526, 87 South. 628, it was…