According to the great weight of American authority, subsequent impossibility discharges the contract so that neither party can recover against the other for breach;1 and instead of their former rights under the contract, the law imposes upon each party the duty of making restitution to the other for the benefits received by him under such contract; so that, as far as possible, the parties will be placed in the position in which they would have been placed if the contract had not been made.2 If a contract for personal services is discharged by the sickness or death of the party who is to render such services, he or his per sonal representatives are entitled to recover a reasonable compenration for the services rendered by him.3 A contract for the employment of an attorney is discharged by his death, but his estate has a right to a reasonable compensation for services rendered by him up to his death;4 and if such attorney was a member of a firm and the surviving partner is permitted to complete the contract, the estate of the deceased partner is entitled to a reasonable amount of the compensation thus earned.5 Where a contract to render services for the life of another does not impose upon the person who is to render such services the risk arising out of his death before the death of the person for whom he is to render services, his estate is entitled to reasonable compensation for services thus rendered by him;6 and the same result has been reached where performance of such services was prevented by illness.7 Under such circumstances recovery may be had during the lifetime of the person for whom such services were to have been rendered.8 A sailor who has been imprisoned lawfully during his time of employment, may recover wages up to the time at which he was imprisoned.9 If a contract for performing work and labor on a house, the house itself belonging to and being under the control of the owner or some one who represents him, is discharged by the destruction of such house without the fault of the contractor who has done work thereon under his contract, such contractor may recover a reasonable compensation for work done by him before such discharge.10 A contract to do lathing and plastering,11 or painting and papering,12 to do part of the brick and mason work,13 or to construct a heating plant which becomes part of the realty as it is constructed,14 to do work other than grading, excavating, stone and brick work and plumbing,15 to put a tin roof on,16 to place pews in a church,17 to repair and remodel an existing structure,18 or to remove an existing building,19 are each discharged by a destruction of such building without the contractor's fault, before the contract is performed, and the contractor may recover on quantum meruit. However, a contract to install a ventilating system has been held not to be discharged by the destruction of the building in which it is being constructed. Accordingly, the contractors can not recover a reasonable compensation for work done.20 Where A agreed to construct an annex to B's building, and building and annex were both burned, it was held that the contract was discharged, and that the owner could recover only the excess of payments made by him to the contractor over payments made by the contractor under the contract.21

3 Cowley v. Northern Pacific Ry., 68 Wash. 558, 41 L. R. A. (N.S.) 559, 123 Pac. 998.

4 Cowley v. Northern Pacific Ry., 68 Wash. 558, 41 L. R. A. (N.S.) 559, 123 Pac. 998.

1 See Sec. 2711. .

2 Alabama. Greene v. Linton, 7 Port. (Ala.) 133, 31 Am. Dec. 707.

Connecticut. Leahy v. Cheney, 90 Conn. 611, 98 Atl. 132.

Illinois. Clark v. Busse, 82 Ill. 515.

Indiana. Coe v. Smith, 4 Ind. 79, 58 Am. Dec. 618.

Iowa. Garretty v. Brazell, 34 Ia. 100.

Kentucky. Louisville & N. R. Co. v.

Crowe, 156 Ky. 27, 49 L. R. A. (N.S.) 848, 160 S. W. 759.

Maine. Preble v. Preble, 115 Me. 26, 97 Atl. 9.

Massachusetts. Butterfield v. Byron, 153 Mass. 517, 25 Am. St. Rep. 654, 12 L. R. A. 571, 27 N. E. 667; Angus v. Scully, 176 Mass. 357, 79 Am. St. Rep. 318, 49 L. R. A. 562, 57 N. E. 674.

Mississippi. Clifton v. Clark, 83 Miss. 446, 102 Am. St. Rep. 458, 36 So. 251; Ganong v. Brown, 88 Miss. 53, 117 Am. St. Rep. 731, 40 So. 556.

New Hampshire. Dame v. Wood, 75 N. H. 38, 70 Atl. 1081.

New York. Wolfe v. Howes, 20 N. Y. 197, 75 Am. Dec. 388; Dolan v.

Rodgers, 149 N. Y. 489, 44 N. E. 167; Sargent v. McLeod, 209 N. Y. 360, 52 L. R. A. (N.S.) 380, 103 N. E. 164.

Ohio. Bailey v. Brown, 9 Ohio C. C. 455, 6 Ohio C. D. 440.

Oklahoma. Allsman v. Oklahoma City, 21 Okla. 142, 16 L. R. A. (N.S.) 511, 95 Pac. 468.

Rhode Island. Parker v. Macomber, 17 R. I. 674, 16 L. R. A. 858, 24 Atl. 464.

South Dakota. McClellan v. Harris, 7 8. D. 447, 64 N. W. 522.

Texas. Hollis v. Chapman, 36 Tex. 1.

West Virginia. Griffith v. Black-water B. & L. Co., 55 W. Va. 604, 69 L. R. A. 124, 48 S. E. 442 [for former opinion, see Griffith v. Lumber Co., 46 W. Va, 56, 33 S. E. 1251; Bell v. Kanawha Traction & Electric Co., -W. Va. -, 98 S. E. 886.

Wisconsin. Cook v. McCabe, 53 Wis. 250, 40 Am. Rep. 765, 10 N. W. 507.

3 England. Chandler v. Grieves, 2 H. Bl. 606.

Connecticut. Ryan v. Dayton, 25 Conn. 188, 65 Am. Dec. 560; Leahy v. Cheney, 90 Conn. 611, 98 Atl. 132.

Illinois. Leopold v. Salkey, 89 Ill. 412, 31 Am. Rep. 93.

Indiana. Coe v. Smith, 4 Ind. 79, 58 Am. Dec. 618.

Maine. Preble v. Preble, 115 Me. 26, 97 Atl. 9.

Massachusetts. Harrington v. Iron Works, 119 Mass 82.

Mississippi. Clifton v. Clark, 83 Miss. 446, 102 Am. St. Rep. 458, 36 So. 251; Ganong v. Brown, 88 Miss. 53 117 Am. St. Rep. 73i, 40 So. 556.

New Jersey. Hargrave v. Conroy, 19 N. J. Eq. 281.

New York. Clark v. Gilbert, 26 N. Y. 279, 84 Am. Dec. 189.

South Dakota. McClellan v. Harris, 7 S. D. 447, 64 N. W. 522.

Vermont Hubbard v. Belden, 27 Vt. 645.

Wisconsin. Green v. Gilbert, 21 Wis. 395.

4 Clifton v. Clark, 83 Miss. 446, 102 Am. St. Rep. 458, 36 So. 251.

5 Clifton v. Clark, 83 Miss. 446, 102 Am. St. Rep. 458, 36 So. 251.

6 Leahy v. Cheney, 90 Conn. 611, 98 Atl. 132.

7 Preble v. Preble, 115 Me. 26, 97 Atl. 9.

8 Preble v. Preble, 115 Me. 26, 97 Atl. 9.

9 Wiggins v. Ingleton, 2 Ld. Raym. 1211.

10 Illinois. Schwartz v. Saunders, 46 Ill. 18; Rawson v. Clark, 70 Ill. 656; Clarke v. Busse, 82 Ill. 515 (substantial performance on part of sub-contractor).

Indiana. Krause V. Board of Trustees, 162 Ind. 278, 102 Am. St. Rep. 203, 65 L. R. A. Ill, 70 N. E. 264.

Iowa. Garretty v. Brazell, 34 Ia. 100.

Massachusetts. Cleary v. Sohier, 120 Mass. 210; Butterfield v. Byron, 153 Mass. 517, 25 Am. St. Rep. 654, 12 L. R. A. 571, 27 N. E. 667.

Mississippi. Ganong v. Brown, 88 Miss. 53, 117 Am. St. Rep. 731, 40 So. 556.

Missouri. Haynes v. Church, 88 Mo.

285, 57 Am. Rep. 413.

New Hampshire. Dame v. Wood, 75 N. H. 38, 70 Atl. 1081.

New York. Whelan v. Ansonia Clock Co., 97 N. Y. 293.

Ohio. Bailey v. Brown, 9 Ohio C. C. 455. 6 Ohio C. D. 440.

Tennessee. Wilson v. Knott, 22 Tenn. (3 Humph.) 473.

Texas. Hollis v. Chapman, 36 Tex. 1; Weis v. Devlin, 67 Tex. 507, 60 Am. Rep. 38, 3 S. W. 726.

Virginia. Clark v. Franklin, 34 Va. (7 Leigh) 1.

West Virginia. Hysell v. Sterling, etc., Co. 46 W. Va. 158, 33 S. E. 95.

Wisconsin. Cook v. McCabe, 53 Wis. 250, 40 Am. Rep. 765, 10 N. W. 507.

11 Cleary v. Sohier, 120 Mass. 210.

12 Ganong v. Brown, 88 Miss. 53, 117 Am. St. Rep. 731, 40 So. 556.

13 Cook v. McCabe, 53 Wis. 250, 40 Am. Rep. 765, 10 N. W. 507.

14 Dame v. Wood, 75 N. II. 38, 70 Atl. 1081.

15 Butterfield v. Byron, 153 Mass. 517, 25 Am. St. Rep. 654, 12 L. R. A. 571. 27 N. E. 667.

16 Hysell v. Sterling, etc., Co., 46 W. Va. 158, 33 S. E. 95.

17 Haynes v. Church, 88 Mo. 285, 57 Am. Rep. 413.

18 Weis v. Devlin, 67 Tex. 507, 60 Am. Rep. 38, 3 S. W. 726.

19 Angus v. Scully, 176 Mass. 357, 79 Am. St. Rep. 318, 49 L. R. A. 562, 57 N. E. 674.