Houghton v. Francis, 29 Ill. 244 (1862)

April 1862 · Illinois Supreme Court

29 Ill. 244

Calvin C. Houghton et al., Appellants, v. Morrison Francis, Appellee.

APPEAL FROM HENRY.

A note payable in six months after date, if not paid when due, to bear ten per cent, interest, is not a conditional note, nor does the introduction into it of a dollar mark, followed by numerals, which may be omitted without aifecting its sense, impair its validity.

This was an action of assumpsit on the note, copied into the opinion of the Court. There was a special count on the note, and the common counts. The defendant below demurred to the special count, and joined issue on the other. The demurrer to the special count was overruled, the defendant abided by his demurrer, and judgment was rendered for Francis by nil dicit, on that count. There was a judgment for plaintiff below on the note. Defendants below appealed.

H. W. Wells, for Appellants.

J. J. Beardsley, and Hinman & Page, for Appellee.

Catón, C. J.

The only question in this case is, whether the following is a promissory note:

Andover, May 7th, I860.

For value received we promise to pay to M. Francis, or order, two hundred and seventy-five dollars, six months after date if not paid when due $276, if called for ten per cent, interest until paid.

T. P. HOUGHTON.

O. 0. HOUGHTON.

Here the sum, time of payment, and payee, are certain, and these are the essential characteristics of a promissory note. The figures and § in the body of the note are useless for good or harm. They are senseless, and may be omitted in reading it. If not paid when due, upon the special call of the payee, then the makers agree to pay ten per cent, interest till paid. This does not make the payment of the note conditional. The promise to pay two hundred and seventy-five dollars, six months from date, to the order of Francis, is absolute.

The judgment is affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.