176 THE RABBIT 



once by an agreed amount for the remainder of the 

 term, on condition that he should hear no more of 

 compensation for damage done by ground game. 

 This satisfied both parties. At all events the landlord 

 had the right to make his own terms in regard to the 

 letting of his own land (which under the Ground 

 Game Act he is now precluded from doing), and the 

 tenant had the satisfaction of knowing that he had 

 secured perhaps a substantial reduction of rent for 

 the remainder of his term. Now the tenant or 

 ' occupier ' has a concurrent right to the ground game, 

 of which he cannot divest himself much as he might 

 like to sell the exclusive right of killing it ; for any 

 agreement in contravention of this is declared by the 

 third section of the Act, as will be seen later, to be 

 void. Still he is not happy, and notwithstanding that 

 when rabbits attack his crops he has the remedy in 

 his own hands and is at liberty to destroy them, he 

 still seeks to get compensation when he can from the 

 landlord, or from the tenant to whom his landlord 

 has let the shooting over his farm. From the reported 

 decisions in actions of this class, it would seem that, 

 wherever a tenant in the occupancy of a farm has a 

 right to kill rabbits, he has no claim for damage done 

 by them to his crops, provided they are bred or 

 burrow on his farm ; for if they are thus permitted to 



