State v. May

Citations

• 33 S.C. 39
• 11 S.E. 440
• 1890 S.C. LEXIS 96

Syllabus

<p>1. The limits of a cross-examination arc within the discretion of the trial judge, and his rulings in this matter will not be interfered with unless an abuse of his discretion is made to appear.</p> <p>2. In a prosecution for selling liquor without a license, a witness and informer may not be asked on cross-examination whether he has not acted as informer in like cases. Such testimony is irrelevant.</p> <p>3. Where a druggist, in ignorance of any intended evasion of the law, fills a prescription from a reputable physician for three pints of whiskey, by selling and delivering it on three several days, one pint each time, there is no violation of the law which prohibits any druggist to “sell more than one time upon the same prescription, whether the same shall direct more than one sale or not. And if a sale be made a second time upon the same prescription, the druggist so selling shall be deemed to have sold without any prescription.” Me. Justice McIvee, dissenting. ’ .</p>