Drunkenness is no defense for the commission of a crime or tort. It may, however, be a defense against the enforcement of a contract made by a party who was so far under the influence of liquor as not to understand the nature of his act.31 A less degree of drunkenness will not make a contract voidable, but may be an element tending to prove fraud in the transaction.32

27 Reando vs. Misplay, 90 Mo., 251.

28 McCormick vs. Little, 85 I11., 62;

Sceva vs. True, 53 N. H., 627.

29 Farnam vs. Brooks, 9 Pick, 212;

Miller vs. Craig, 36 I11., 109; Elwood vs. O'Brien, 105 Iowa, 239. 30 Molton vs. Camroux, 2 Exch. 489.

31 Foote vs. Tewksbury, 2 Vr., 97; Musselman vs. Cravers, 47 Ind., 8; Bates vs. Ball, 72 I11., 108.

32 Canlkins vs. Fory, 35 Conn., 170; Johnson vs. Phifer, 6 Neb., 401; Murray vs. Carlin, 67 I11., 286.