
    L. F. Petty v. Fleishel & Smith.
    A note which omits the word dollars, but inserts the numbers, means dollars. Where a note is payable in currency, and the defendant makes default, it is proper to take judgment for the face of the note in dollars, without a writ of inquiry to find the value of the currency.
    Error from Smith. The case was tried before Hon. Reuben A. Reeves, one of the district judges.
    The contract is sufficiently set out in the opinion of the court. The defendant having made default, judgment was rendered against the defendant for $461 56. The defendant prosecuted error.
    
      Tignal W. Jones, for plaintiff in error,
    insisted that the
    word dollars was not inserted in the note; it was not a promissory note. (Story on Prom. Notes, §§ 18, 19.) Also that the claim was for. unliquidated damages. (Ricks v. Pinson, 21 Tex., 508; Ward v. Latimer, 2 Tex., 248; Roberts v. Short, 1 Tex., 373.)
    
      Heaves §■ Douglas, for defendants in error.
    —I. The omission of dollars was immaterial. (Evans v. Steele, 2 Ala., R. S., 114; Mason v. McLaughlin, 16 Tex., 24.)
    
      II. The judgment for default was proper. (Watson v. Newton, 17 Tex., 437; Guest v. Rhine, 16 Tex., 550; Willard v. Conduit, 10 Tex., 214; Swift v. Farriss, 11 Tex., 19; Long v. Wortham, 4 Tex., 382; Hall v. Jackson, 3 Tex., 305; Ricks v. Pinson, 21 Tex., 508; Trabue v. Stonum, 20 Tex., 454.) Hence they renew the suggestion óf delay.
   Latimer, J.

—This is a suit based upon a note for four hundred and nine T6^-, in currency. Judgment by default.

Defendants contend that as the word dollars was not mentioned in the note, although the pleadings alleged the mistake in its omission, yet, as there was no jury, this could not be proved.

The note as copied is as follows:

“$409 68 cents. By the 1st day of April I promise to pay Fleishel & Smith, or bearer, four hundred and nine T6^-, in currency, for value received. L. F. Petty.

“ Starville, Texas, January 19, 1866.”

The note, beginning with “ $409 68” cents and proceeding with a promise to pay “ four hundred and nine •IIW” currency, furnishes ample authority to conclude that the sum to be paid was 409 68 cents, or $409 68 in currency.

There is no error in the judgment, and it is

Affirmed.  