The credibility of the witnesses whose testimony (alleged to be newly discovered) constitutes the basis of an extraordinary motion for a new trial is a matter addressed exclusively to the trial judge, and it can' not be said that in refusing a new trial in the present case the trial judge abused his discretion, since the strongest evidence adduced consisted of an affidavit of the prosecuting witness in which he asserted that his testimony on the trial was false. Jordan v. State, 124 Ga. 417 (52 S. E. 768), and cases cited. A new trial should not be granted solely upon the ground that the accused was convicted upon false testimony, unless the falsity of the testimony has been established by a conviction for perjury of the witness delivering such testimony. Civil Code, § 5961. Judgment affirmed.