This appeal is prosecuted from a judgment of the court below on a promissory note. Plaintiff in error fails to set out in his brief the specifications of error complained of, separately set forth and numbered, and argument and authorities relied on, as is required by. rule 25 (38 Okla. x, 95 Pac. viii). He argueé certain propositions of law in his brief; but we are unable to determine from his brief, in the absence of any specifications of error, whether such propositions of law arose upon any action of the cou'rt below to which exceptions have been duly saved, to be presented to this court on.appeal. It has been held repeatedly that, where the foregoing rule is not *233 complied with in the brief of plaintiff in error, the. appeal will be dismissed. Eiklor v. Badger, 25 Okla. 853, 108 Pac. 359; Mahaney v. Union Inv. Co., 23 Okla. 533, 101 Pac. 1054.

The proceeding in error is dismissed.