If it is still possible to perform a given condition, the act of the party for whose benefit such condition is inserted in repudiating liability upon some other ground operates as a waiver of such condition.1 A repudiation of liability upon an insurance policy waives a right of treating such policy as discharged because of the subsequent failure to pay premiums,2 or to furnish proofs of loss.3 If, on the other hand, performance of a condition is not possible, or if the condition rests solely with the will of the party in whose favor it is inserted, a repudiation of the contract on one ground does not induce the adversary party to act to his prejudice, and accordingly such conduct is frequently said not to amount to a waiver of such condition.4 If A has reserved the right to terminate a contract at his option, his declaration that he terminates the contract for a specific though insufficient reason is not a waiver of his right to terminate at will.5

7 For the right to waive such provision and the effect of legislation which forbids discrimination between shippers, see Sec. 736 et seq.

8 Arkansas. Wells v. Townsend & Freeman Co., 134 Ark. 500, 204 S. W. 417.

Michigan. Slider v. Pere Marquette R. Co., .194 Mich. 581, 161 N. W. 961.

Mississippi. Illinois Central R. Co. v. Wm. Atkinson & McDonald Co., 113 Miss. 678, 74 So. 616; Illinois Central R. Co. v. Bauer, 114 Miss. 516, 75 So. 376; Berstein v. Yazoo & M. V. R. Co., 116 Miss. 382, 77 So. 146.

North Carolina. Reynolds v. Adams Express Co., 172 N. Car. 487, 90 S. E. 510.

North Dakota. Shark v. Great Northern Ry. Co., 37 N. D. 342, 164 N. W. 39.

9 Lorenz v. Hart-Parr Co., 146 Wis, 261, 50 L. R. A. (N.S.) 796, 131 N. W. 446.

11nter-Southern Life Ins. Co. v. Duff,

184 Ky. 227, 211 S. W. 738; Young v. Hartford Life Ins. Co., - Mo. -, 211 S. W. 1; Gilbert v. Globe & Rutgers Fire Insurance Co., 91 Or. 59, 3 A. L. R. 203, 174 Pac. 1161; Sheppard v. Peabody Ins. Co., 21 W. Va. 368; Dietz v. Providence Washington Ins. Co., 33 W. Va. 526, 25 Am. St. Rep. 908, 11 S. E. 50; Peninsular Land Transpor. & Mfg. Co. v. Franklin Ins. Co., 35 W. Va. 666, 14 S. E. 237; Cleavenger v. Franklin F. Ins. Co., 47 W. Va. 593, 35 S. E. 998; Medley v. German-Alliance Ins. Co., 55 W. Va. 342, 2 Am. & Eng. Ann. Cas. 99, 47 S. E. 101; Houseman v. Home Ins. Co., 78 W. Va. 203, L. R. A. 1917A, 299, 88 S. E. 1048; Pauley v. Sun Ins. Office, 79 W. Va. 187, L. R. A. 1918E, 473, 90 S. E. 552.

2 Inter-Southern Life Ins. Co. v. Duff, 184 Ky. 227, 211 S. W. 738.

3 Sheppard v. Peabody Ins. Co., 21 W. Va. 368; Deitz v. Providence Washington Ins. Co., 33 W. Va. 526, 25 Am. St. Rep. 908, 11 S. E. 50; Peninsular Land

The repudiation of liability for a given reason has been held to be a waiver of a breach of another condition, even though it is no longer possible for the party in default to perform such other condition.6 A refusal of a beneficial association to pay a claim on the ground that the assessments were in default waives a defense that the insured had made a false statement which is material to the risk.7