Sec 1039

A release may be made dependent upon conditions.1 If the condition be subsequent, the release operates as a suspension, and the debt revives on the happening of the condition. This is the case with deeds of composition containing releases with the proviso that if there be default in the payment of the composition the release is to be inoperative.2 Of conditions precedent we have illustrations in deeds of composition in which the release is not to take effect until certain payments are made, or certain contingencies take place.3

Sec 1040

As has already been seen,4 a release may, before breach, be by novation, i.e., by extinguishing of an old unperformed contract by substituting a new contract in its place. In such cases the original debtor is released on the acceptance of the substituted debtor. And, as we have also already seen,5 indebtedness in an informal or parol contract may be released by its merger in a security of greater solemnity. Prior informal conferences are thus merged in written contracts,6 and simple contracts are merged in sealed contracts when meant to cover the same grouud.7 But this effect is not produced when the sealed document is taken as a collateral, as when a specialty executed by a surety is received.8 - When a new is adopted in the place of an old agreement, the substitution being meant to be entire, then the old is extinguished.9 And where a contract of service was terminated by one party resigning and the other accepting the resignation, there being no provision made for any future settlement, and no recognition of any past indebtedness, it was held that the employee could not sue the employer Release may be conditional.

Release may be by novation and merger on the old agreement for a pro rata apportionment of salary which might have been clue between the last day fixed for payment and the resignation.1

1 Supra, sec 548 et seq.

2 Newington V. Levy, L. R. 6 C. P. 180; Hall V. Levy, L. R. 10 C. P. 154; see supra, sec 608.

3 Walker V. Nevill, 3 H. & C. 403; Corner V. Sweet, L. R. 1 C. P. 456; Gibbons V. Vouillon, 8 C. B. 483. And see supra, sec 545 et seq.

4 Supra, sec 852 et seq., 1003 et seq. 5 Supra, sec 684.

6 Supra, sec 5, 643; Wh. on EV. sec 1014.

7 Supra, sec 683.

8 See supra, sec 684; Tarr V. Northey, 17 Me. 113; Charles V. Scott, 1 S. & R. 294; Sterling V. Rogers, 25 Wend. 658, and cases cited Ch. on Cont. 11th Am. ed. 1161.

9 See as to novation, supra, sec 852 et seq.; and also, as to rescission by parol, supra, sec 661.

Sec 1041

A party who either makes or permits a material alteration in a document under which he claims title, is precluded from using such document as evidence.2 The burden is on the party producing an altered document to explain the alteration;3 but should the alterations prove to have been merely accidental, or to have been trivial, or to have been made during negotiation, they do not affect the rights of the party to claims on the document, supposing it to be legible.4