LBATHEBBESBT V. ODEIiIi. 641 �a clause reserving the right of re-entry for a breach thereof, in order to enable a grantor to avail himself Of a forfeiture. In this case, as it is stated in the pleadings and conceded in the argument that the defendant grantors remained in pos- session of the premises in controversy, I am of the opinion that they becaihe revested with the estate conveyed if there •was a breach of the condition expressed in the grant, unless they did some act which waived the forfeiture occasioned by such breach. Proper issues may be framed to enable the jury to ascertain from the evidence and find by their verdict whether there was a breach of the conditions expreSsed in the grant, and whether there was a waiver of such breach on the part of the grantors. The court will instruct thie jury upon the question of reasoaaible time in the performance of the conditions. �■il The jury being empanelled, it was conceded by both par- ties that the grantees did some work on the premises, in making explorations for minerais and metals, in the year 1854, and had done no work since that time. �The jury, after the charge of the court, returned a verdict for the defendants. ���Leatherbebby V. Odell, Eagan & Co. IGiraiill Court, W. D. Norfh Uœrollna. ■ , 1880.) �1. Masthii ahd Servant— CoBfTRACT oi" Sbbvice— Dibchabgb. �Where one servant violates or fails to opmply with any express or iniplied condition of the contract of service, which resulta in mate- rial injury to the business of the master, or which amounts to insub- ordination or disregard of his feelings and proper authority, the con- tract may be determincd bef ore the expiration of the term of service. �2. Samb— Samb— Samb. �There is an implied contract npon the part of a servant that she is competent to discharge the duties foi' which she was employed, and a breach of such contract will, thereforc, warrant her discharge be- fore the term of service has expired v.7,no.6— 41 ��� �
