If one party to a contract makes it impossible for the other party to perform the contract or delays the performance of it, the party who thus makes performance impossible on the part of the other, can not treat the default of the adversary party, which is thus caused, as discharging himself from liability.1 The party who is prevented from performing further may recover damages for the breach of the contract, or compensation for what he has done without performing fully.2 A sold a monument to B, upon which were to be inscribed four lines of verse to be furnished by B. It was held that if B refused to furnish the lines of verse, A could erect the monument without the verse and recover the contract price, less the cost of inscribing such lines of verse.3 A agreed to construct certain wood-work in B's building. Before it was completed the roof of the building fell, through the negligence of B's employes. A was allowed to recover for the part of the work that had been done, although it was injured by such fall.4 One who agrees to support another at the house of such other, is discharged from further liability and permitted to sue in assumpsit for work done upon demand of the owner of the house that the other leave the premises.5 If A, who is a mortgagee under a construction mortgage, agrees to make certain payments to a subcontractor when the principal contractor has completed the work, and A subsequently agrees with the principal contractor that certain items may be omitted, A can not resist making such payment to the subcontractor on the ground that the principal contractor did not complete the work in accordance with the terms of the original contract.6 Though no test was provided for, A, who furnishes piping to carry off shavings and dust from certain machinery and places an exhaust fan furnished by B, can recover, although owing to a defect in the fan the result is not successful.7 If a contract for the sale of a heating plant contains a provision to the effect that the contractor has a year in which to make good any defects which may develop therein, the act of the owner in removing the entire plant during such time, and while the contractor is attempting to remove such defects, operates as a discharge of the contractor from liability imposed by such covenant;8 and he may recover the full contract price.9

21 McConnell v. Corona City Water Co., 149 CaL 60, 8 L R A (N.S.) 1171, 85 Pac. 920 (timber for a tunnel).

22 Lehmann v. Warren, 209 111 264, 70 N. E 600; Kinney v. Philadelphia Watch Case Co., 76 N. J. L. 735, 71 Atl. 269.

23Lehmann v. Warren, 209 111. 264, 70 N. E. 600.

24 Campfleld v. Sauer, 189 Fed. 676, 38 L. R. A. (N.S.) 837; Gill v. Hale & Kilburn Co., 257 Fed. 906; Seventh St. Planing Mill Co. v. Schaefer (Ky.), 99 S. W. 341, 30 Ky. L. Rep. 623.

25 Campfield v. Sauer, 189 Fed. 576, 38 L. R. A. (N.S.) 837; Seventh St. Planing Mill Co. v. Schaefer (Ky.), 99 S. W. 341, 30 Ky. L. Rep. 623.

26 Huetter v. Warehouse & Realty Co., 81 Wash. 331, L. R. A. 1915C, 671, 142 Pac. 675.

27 Guerini Stone Co. v. Carlin Construction Co., 240 U. S. 264, 60 L. ed. 636.

1 United States. United States v. Peck, 102 U. S. 64, 26 L. ed. 46; Great Falls v. Theis, 79 Fed. 943; Blodgett V. Zinc Co., 120 Fed. 893; Campfield V. Sauer, 189 Fed. 576, 38 L. R. A.

(N.S.) 837; Atlantic City v. Warren Bros. Co., 220 Fed. 372, 141 C. C. A. 202; Crocker v. United States, 49 Ct. CI. 85; Miller v. United States, 40 Ct. CI. 276; Morris v. United States, 50 Ct. CI. 154.

California. McConnell v. Corona City Water Co., 149 Cal. 60, 8 L. R. A. (N.S.) 1171, 85 Pac. 929.

Colorado. Brewer v. McCain, 21 Colo. 382, 41 Pac. 822; Miser Gold Mining & Milling Co. v. Moody, 37 Colo. 310, 86 Pac. 335; Empson Packing Co. v. Clawson, 43 Colo. 188, 95 Pac. 546; Burrell v. Masters, - Colo. - , 176 Pac. 316.

Connecticut. Morehouse v. Bradley, 80 Conn. 611, 69 Atl. 937.

Illinois. Christopher & Simpson Architectural Iron & Foundry Co. v. Yeager, 202 III. 486, 67 N. E. 166; Lehmann v. Warren, 209 III. 264, 70 N. E. 600; Zempel v. Hughes, 235 111. 424, 85 N. E. 641.

Indian Territory. Degnan v. Now-lin, 5 Ind. Terr. 312, 82 S. W. 758.

Indiana. Indianapolis Northern Traction Co. v. Brennan, 174 Ind. 1, 30 L. R. A. (N.S ) 85, 87 N. E. 215, 90 N. E. 65; Shirk v. Lingeman, 26 Ind. App. 630, 59 N. E. 941.

Iowa. Loftus v. Riley, 83 la. 503, 50 N. W. 17.

Kentucky. Seventh St. Planing Mill Co. v. Schaefer (Ky .), 99 S. W. 341, 30 Ky. L. Rep. 623; Williams v. Yates (Ky.), 113 S. W. 503.

Louisiana. Hebert v. Weil, 115 La. 424, 39 So. 389.

Massachusetts. Parrot v. Mexican Central Ry, 207 Mass. 184, 34 L. R. A. (N.S.) 261, 93 N. E. 590; Swartzman v. Babcock, 218 Mass. 334, 105 N. E. 1022.

Michigan. Gates v. Detroit & Mackinac Ry. Co., 147 Mich. 523, 111 N. W. 101; Malcolmson-Houghten Co. v. Gregorian Building Co., 191 Mich. 678, 158 N. W. 126.

New Hampshire. Famous Players Film Co. v. Salomon, - N. H - , 106 Atl. 282.

New York. Howard v, American Mfg. Co., 162 N. Y. 347, 56 N. E. 986; Mosler Safe Co. v. Maiden Lane Safe Deposit Co., 199 N. Y. 479, 37 L. R. A. (N.S.) 363, 93 N. E. 81; Patterson v. Mayerhofer, 204 N. Y. 96, 97 N. E. 472.

Ohio. Filmore v. Metropolitan Ins. Co., 82 O. S. 208, 92 N. E. 26; Klaus-termeyer v. Cleveland Trust Co., 89 O. S. 142, 105 N. E. 278 (obiter).

Oregon. Vanderhoof v. Shell, 42 Or. 578, 72 Pac. 126.

Pennsylvania. Hunn v. Pennsylvania Institution for Blind, 221 Pa. St. 403, 18 L. R. A. (N.S.) 1248, 70 Atl. 812; Kress House Moving Co. v. George Hogg Co., 263 Pa. St. 191, 106 AtL 351.

Tennessee. Gardner v. Deeds, 116 Tenn. 128, 4 L. R. A. (N.S.) 740, 92 S. W. 518.

Utah. William B. Hughes Produce Co. v. Pulley, 47 Utah 544, L. R. A. 1916D, 728, 155 Pac. 337.

Vermont. Morgan v. Tucker, 78 Vt. 56, 61 Atl. 863.

. Washington. Bishop v. Averill, 17 Wash. 209, 49 Pac. 237, 50 Pac. 1024.

West Virginia. Delmar Oil Co. v. Bartlett, 62 W. Va. 700, 59 S. E. 634.

Wisconsin. Olson v. Viroqua, 121 Wis. 571, 105 Am. St. Rep. 1039, 99 N. W. 326; Loehr v. Dickson, 141 Wis. 332, 30 L. R. A. (N.S.) 495, 124 N. W. 293.

2 United States. E. I. Du Pont Nemours Powder Co. v. Schlottman, 218 Fed. 353 [affirming, Schlottman v. E.

I. Du Pont de Nemours Powder Co., 210 Fed. 356].

Arkansas. Mena v. Tomlinson, 118 Ark. 166, 175 S. W. 1187.

Connecticut. Morehouse v. Bradley, 80 Conn. 611, 69 Atl. 97; Beattie v. New York, N. H. & H. R. R. Co., 84 Conn. 555, 80 Atl. 709.

Illinois. Zempel v. Hughes, 235 111. 424, 85 N. . 641.

Indiana. Indianapolis Northern Traction Co. v. Brennan, 174 Ind. 1, 30 L. R. A. (N.S.) 85, 87 N. E. 215, 90 N. E. 65, 91 N. E. 503.

Indian Territory. Degnan v. Now-lin, 5 Ind. Terr. 312, 82 S. W. 758.

Maryland. Black v. Woodrow, 30 Md. 194; North v. Mallory, 94 Md. 305, 51 Atl. 89.

Rhode Island. Parker v. Macomber.

17 R. I. 674, 10 L. R A. 858, 21 Atl. 404.

Washington. Hucltor v Warehouse & Realty Co., 81 Wash 331, L R A 1915C, 671, 142 Pac 675

West Virginia. Delmnr Oil Co. v. Bartlott, 62 W. Va. 700, 50 S. E. 634.

Wisconsin. Hildebrand v. American Fine Art Co., 109 Wis. 171, 53 L. R. A. 826, 85 N. W. 208.

3 Eastern Granite Co. v. Heim, 89 la. 698, 57 N W. 437.

4Teakle v. Moore, 131 Mich. 427, 91 N. W. 636.

5 Parker v. Macomber, 17 R. I 074, 16 L. R. A. 858, 24 Atl. 464.

6 Swartzman v. Babcock, 218 Mass. 334, 105 N E 1022

7May Mantel Co v. Blow-Pipe Co, 03 Ga. 778, 21 S. E. 142.

While the party prevented from further performance can recover damages, he can not recover the full contract price us if he had performed in full if his performance is in fact less than substantial performance.10