And, on the other hand, any alteration of the subject-matter of the contract by the vendor, in any particular which does not admit of compensation or reinstatement, as the fall of ornamental timber (r), will entitle the purchaser to abandon the contract.

Purchaser wrongfully induced to give up possession, may maintain use and occupation when contract is completed.

Purchaser compelled to reinstate premises which he had altered.

Whether, if reinstatement im-possible, pur-chaser may not be compelled to keep the property.

Material alteration of property by vendor may avoid contract; e.g. fall of ornamental timber.

(n) King v. King, 1 Myl. & K. 442. (o) Hull v. Vaughan, 6 Pri. 157; and see 7 Q. B. 617.

(p) Donovan v. Fricker, Jac. 165. (q) Sug. 279.

And in a case between vendor and purchaser, the Court, it is conceived, would consider whether the timber destroyed were in fact, or might reasonably be considered, ornamental; and would not - as in cases between tenant for life and remainderman - only regard as ornamental, timber which was planted or left for ornament (s).

We (t) have already considered the relative rights of the vendor and purchaser in the several events of the estate increasing or diminishing in value, or of the failure of the consideration for, or subject-matter of, the contract, before conveyance.