¶1 The indictment was in two counts, 0ne charging the manufacture of whisky, an¿ the other the unlawful possession of a still, etc. The verdict was general and referable to either count in the indictment. Haney v. State, 19 Ala.App. 79, 95 So. 57.
¶2 The evidence for the state was sufficient to justjfy a verdict of guilt, and, while the testimony of the defendants was to the contrary, the question was for the jury,
¶3 other exceptions baye been examined, and we find them all free from error/
¶4 . , , . rr , The judgment is affirmed. °
¶5 A rmed*