Little, J.
The motion for new trial contains several grounds and presents, a number of legal questions, but the case turns upon whether or not there was any evidence to support the plea of usury, which was the sole defense set up against the plaintiff’s action. There was no such evidence, and the verdict rendered was the only one which could have been lawfully •returned. Consequently, there was no error in overruling the motion for a new trial. Judgment affirmed,.
All the Justices concurring.