¶1The defendant was convicted of the manufacture of intoxicating liquors contrary to an ordinance of Minneapolis. The trial was to the court without a jury. The only question is as to the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a finding of guilty. We have examined it. There was evidence in proof of the defendant’s guilt, and evidence in disproof of it. A finding either way would be sustained and there is no profit in reviewing the testimony.
¶2Judgment affirmed.