¶1In tlie light of the entire, record, there is no substantial merit in any of the special assignments of error; the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict, and the trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.
¶2Judgment affirmed.
¶3dissenting. The remark of the solicitor-general in the concluding argument, that the witnesses for the defendant were "the scums of the earth,” in my opinion entitled the defendant to a mistrial, which was timely asked; especially in view of the fact that the record discloses that the court unduly circumscribed the investigation into the motives and interest of certain witnesses for the prosecution. See Miller v. State, 8 Ga. App. 540 (69 S. E. 933); Pelham & Havana Railroad Co. v. Elliott. 11 Ga. App. 631 (4) (75 S. E. 1063); Knowles v. Dayries Rice Co., 10 Ga. App. 567 (73 S. E. 56); Smith v. Rothschild, 13 Ga. App. 393, 394, 398 (79 S. E. 88); Manning v. State, 13 Ga. App. 709 (79 S. E. 905).