Where, in undertaking to verify a hill of exceptions, the judge-in his certificate states that he does “not certify to arguments and conclusions ’ ’ therein contained, and upon an examination of the hill of exceptions it is impossible to determine what portions thereof the judge intended to characterize ” as “arguments and conclusions ” rather than recitals of fact, the writ of error must he dismissed. This court has no jurisdiction to consider a hill of exeep*348tions where the certificate verifies it in part only and shows it to be in part untrue. Hawkins v. Americus, 102 Ga. 786; Fort v. Sheffield, 108 Ga. 781; Sanges v. State, 110 Ga. 260; McCullough Co. v. Bank, 111 Ga. 132.

Writ of error dismissed.