Hon. Bert~Ford 

Administrator 

Texas Llquo? Control Board 

Austin, Texas 

Dear Sir: Opinion NO. 0-1882~ 

Re: Right of lnaivlaual to pin-chase' 

liquor for own' use lri wet county 

and transport the same to his 

home Fn dry county. 

This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of 

January 22, 1940, in which you submlt for an oplnlon of this 

department the~.questlons: 

"Under the law Is it pertilsslble f~or a person 

living in Collln County/which Is a dry county, to 

~drlve his automobile to Dallas County, which Fs a 

wet county, and.there purchase whiskey or other 

intoxicating liquor for his own personal use, and 

haul the same back to his home in Collln Coiinty, 

under Section 23 (a)~,' Article I, of the Texas 

Liquor Control Act, and not be guilty of a law 

violation? 

"In such case is Lt necessary for him to have 

Fn his. possession while hauling such liquor 3 

written statement required ~by Section 27 (al, 

Article I, of the TelZas Liquor Control Act? In 

this connection we call your attention to Sectidn 

4 (,b), Article I', TexaP Liquor Control Act, which 

prohibits the transportation of liquor in a dry 

Wea,,and to Section 23 (a), which provides that 

a person who purchases alcoholic beverages for 

hLs own consumption may transport same from a place 

where the sale thereof is legal to a place where 

the possession thereof is legal; ardalso Section 

27 (a), Article I, which provides that It shall be 

unlawful for any person to transpprt upon any public hlghway, street or alley, any' lfqu6r unless 

the person in charge of such shipment shall have 

l&his possession, present and available, a written 

statement signed by the shipper giving certain lnformation." 
Hon. Bert Ford, page 2 o-1882 

Paragraph (b) of Article 666-4 of the Penal Code 

reads: 

"(b) . It shall be unlawful for any person 

In any dry area to manufacture, distill, brew, 

sell, possess for the purpose of sale, import 

Into this State, export from the State, transport, distribute, warehouse, store, solicit or 

take orders for, or for the purpose of sale to 

bottle, rectify, blend, treat, fortify, mix, or 

process any liquor, distilled spirits, whiskey, 

gin, brandy, wine, rum, beer or ale." 

Thus it is clearly seen that it Is not unlawful to 

possess llluor In a dry area but t$e offense Isthe possession 

of~llquor for the purpose of sale . An information charging 

that defendant possessed whiskey does not charge an offense 

when not charging that the whiskey was possessed for the purpose of sale. Alexander vs. State, 113 SW 2nd 545. 

It then becomes necessary to determine whether or not 

the word "transport", used in the above quoted article would 

prevent the purchaser of the liquor, under the facts stated by 

you, from transporting the same to his home in a dry county. 

Paragraph (1) of Article 666-23a, of the Penal Code 

reads: 

"(1). It Is provided tha,t any person who purchases alcoholic beverages for his own consumption 

may transport same from a place where the sale 

thereof is legal to a place where the possession 

thereof is legal." 

We conclude that such provision, next hereinabove 

quoted, is a defensive statute designed to afford one accused 

of transporting liquor in violation of paragraph (b) of 

Article 666-4, supra, a complete defense against the charge so 

made. In other words, upon the accused making proof that he 

was transporting alcoholic beverages for his own consumption 

from a point of purchase to a given destination, his innocence 

would be established. 

It is to be ~noted, however, that the defense afforded 

by the hereinabove quoted section is followed by paragraph 

(2) of the same article which reads: 

"(2) . Possession of'more than one'quart of 

liquor in a dry area shall be prima facie evidence 

that It is possessed for the purposes of sale." 
Bon. Bert Ford, page 3 o-1882 

We must necessarily conclude that the mere possession 

and~transportation of liquor, under the facts presented by 

you, does not render the one in possession thereof guilty of 

an offense. As pointed out, the possession of more than one 

quart by any person within a dry area is prima facie evidence 

of Its possession for the purpose of sale. Natiurally, proof 

by the accused of its possession for his own use and not for 

the purpose of sale would be a matter of defense. 

We next turn our attentlon to the proposition of 

whether or not it is necessary for one transporting liquor, 

under the provisions of paragraph (l), Article 666~23a, supra, 

to,have a written statement required by paragraph (a), Article 

666-27 of the Penal Code. Such section reads: 

"(a). It shall be unlawful for any person 

to transportinto this State or upon any public 

highway, street, or alley in this State any 

liquor unless the person accompanying or in charge 

of such shipment shall have present and available 

for exhibition and inspection, a written statement 

furnished and signed by the shipper, showing the 

name and address of the consignor and the consignee, 

the origin and destination of such shipment, and 

such other information as may be required by rule 

and regulation of the Board. It shall be the duty 

of the person in charge of such shipment while 

the same is being transported, to exhibit such 

written statement to the Board or any of its 

authorized representatives or to any peace officer making demand therefor, and it shall be 

unlawful for any person to fail or refuse to 

exhibit the same upon such demand. Such written 

statement shall be accepted by such representative or officer as prima facie evidencz of the 

lawful right to transport such liquor. 

We th.ink this section has reference to shipment of 

liquor, as that term is ord~inarily used and understood, as 

where a person orders liquor and it Is delivered to him either 

by common carrier or agent for the consignee or consignor. 

It is our opinion that the same is not applicable to the 

situation presented by your statement of facts. 
Hon. Bert Ford, page 4 0 -1882 

Yours very truly 

ATTORNEYGENERAL OF TEXAS 

,By s/Lloyd Armstrong 

Lloyd Armstrong 

Assistant 

LA:AW:wc 

s/Gerald C. Mann 

Approved Opinion Committee By s/BWB Chairman