Where several persons make up a sum of money together to purchase liquor and one of them procures it with the money so contributed, there is no violation.72 So, also, one who merely purchases intoxicating liquor for another and receives only the amount of money the liquor actually costs commits no offense; he is merely the agent of the actual purchaser.73

68 Thomas vs. State, 37 Miss., 353;

Armstrong vs. State (Tex. Cr.), 47 S. W., 1006; Richardson vs. Com., 76 Va., 1007; Hughes' Cr. Law, Sec. 1403.

69 Dobson vs. State, 57 Ind., 69.

70 Rickart vs. People, 79 Ill., 87;

Newark vs. Essex Club, 53 N. J., 99; People vs. Soule, 74 Mich., 250; People vs. Andrews, 115 N. Y., 428; Com. vs. Ryan, 152 Mass., 283.

71 Com. vs. Pomphret, 137 Mass., 564; State vs. St. Louis Club, 125 Mo., 308; Seim vs. State, 55 Md., 566; People vs. Adelphi Club, 149 N. Y., 5; Contra: State vs. Shumate, 44 W. Va., 490.

72 Hogg vs. People, 15 Ill. App., 288; Jones vs. State, 100 Ga., 579; Evans vs. State, 101 Ga., 780; Graff vs. Evans, 8 Q. B. D., 373.

73 Hughes' Cr. Law, Sec. 1399; DuBois vs. State, 87 Ala., 101; Reed vs. State (Tex. Cr.), 44 S. W., 1093; State vs. Thomas, 13 W. Va.. 848.