The defendant sold at his sandwich stand what was agreed to be a malt beverage commonly known as 3.2 beer. A statute made it unlawful for any person to sell "any spirituous, malt, vinous, fermented or other intoxicating liquors." In an action to enjoin the maintaining of a liquor nuisance the trial judge held that as the -defendant sold a malt liquor, the sale was a violation of the statute, and refused to admit evidence that the beer was not intoxicating as a matter of fact. On appeal, the supreme court of Kansas held, that while beer is presumed to be intoxicating, the defendant has a right to introduce evidence tending to prove that what he sold was not intoxicating as a matter of fact. Kansas v. Owston, (Kan. 1933) 23 Pac. (2d) 616.