
    Brooks vs. Hargraves.
    Error to Wayne Circuit.
   Campbell, C. J.

The only question was whether the following instrument constituted a promissory note or not:

$533 00 Detroit, Mich, Dec. 24,1867.
One year after date, for value received, we promise to pay to Joseph Smith, or bearer, five hundred and eighty-three dollars, with interest — this to be paid when any dividends shall be declared on such shares as Joseph Smith has been holding heretofore in the Agricultural and Broomhandle Manufacturing Company of Trenton, Mich. (Signed)
Geo. Hargraves & Bro.

The note was given for the purchase price of the shares of stock referred to, and no dividend has ever been declared.— Held, that as, according to the terms of the instrument, the time of payment was not certain, it could not be regarded as a-promissory note.

Judgment affirmed with costs.  