
    PORTWOOD v. BENNETT TRADING COMPANY.
    No. 11830.
    June 17, 1937.
    Rehearing denied July 10, 1937.
    
      
      Ezra E. Phillips, for plaintiff in error. J. L. B. Boyd and Victor K. Meador, for persons at interest.
    
      J. Mallory Hunt, contra. B. B. Jackson and G. E. Moore, for persons at interest.
   Per Curiam.

1. When a given state of facts will authorize several different conclusions, it is a question of fact as to which is the true and correct solution; but where only one reasonable inference can be drawn therefrom, the question is resolved into one of law, and may be determined as a matter of law by the court. Code, § 110-104; Dixon v. Bristol Savings Bank, 102 Ga. 461, 468 (31 S. E. 96, 66 Am. St. R. 193).

2. The facts stated in the certified question, if proved without dispute Or qualification, would authorize no inference other than that the “transactions did not constitute a series of bona fide assignments of wages, but amounted to a loan upon usurious interest, with renewals thereof, and were continued merely as a scheme or device to evade the laws against usury,” and therefore would demand such conclusion as a matter of law. Jackson v. Bloodworth, 41 Ga. App. 216 (152 S. E. 289); Hinton v. Mack Purchasing Co., 41 Ga. App. 823, 825 (155 S. E. 78); Parsons v. Fox, 179 Ga. 605 (176 S. E. 642). It follows that the question certified should be answered in the affirmative.

All the Justices concur.

Beck, Presiding Justice, and Atkinson and Hutcheson, Justices, are of the opinion that the question is not such a definite. question of law unmixed with fact that it should be answered, but agree that the answer as stated is correct.

ON MOTION EOR REHEARING.

Contending that the question as certified does not present all of the facts which should be considered in a decision of the case, the defendant in error has moved for a rehearing, in order that this court may request the Court of Appeals to amend the question so that it will <c cover the substance of all facts shown in the trial court.” The final adjudication of the case is a matter for the Court of Appeals, and the instruction given by this court will apply only to the question certified. If. it is true, as contended, that additional facts should be considered, the answer made by this court to the specific question will not prevent the Court of Appeals from considering such facts in deciding the case. See Georgian Co. v. Jones, 154 Ga. 762 (115 S. E. 490); Eatonton Oil & Auto Co. v. Greene County, 181 Ga. 47, 52 (181 S. E. 758).

Rehearing denied.  