LAND LAWS. 



525 



labor in making improvements and in render- 

 ing the soil more productive. Long ago the 

 law gave the tenant at will the right to return 

 and harvest the crop that he had sown hut 

 not yet reaped when he left the holding, in or- 

 der that he might not lose the just fruit of 

 his seed and labor. In time it extended the 

 tenant's right somewhat, and presumed that, 

 when he had paid rent and no term was spe- 

 cified, the tenancy was not a tenancy at will, 

 but from year to year, and, that the tenant 

 might not be put to loss or inconvenience by 

 the sudden termination of his tenancy, required 

 the landlord who wished to resume possession 

 of the holding to give him six months' notice 

 to quit. The Agricultural Holdings Act of 1883 

 made twelve months' notice necessary. The 

 old law, as laid down in the statute of Glouces- 

 ter, declared that whatever was affixed to the 

 soil was for legal purposes a part of it, and the 

 property of the landlord. Contract and cus- 

 tom, however, sometimes gave the tenant his 

 fixtures, and he was in time allowed by law to 

 remove all fixtures set up for purposes of trade, 

 then to remove buildings or machinery erected 

 with the consent of the landlord, and later to 

 take away engines, machinery, and some other 

 fixtures erected without the landlord's consent. 

 The Agricultural Holdings Act of 1883 allows 

 him to remove engines, machinery, and other 

 fixtures, and buildings that have not been 

 erected instead of other buildings or in pursu- 

 ance or contravention of the contract, and for 

 which he is not entitled to compensation under 

 the act or otherwise. In some parts of the 

 country, in order to encourage the tenant to 

 adopt the best methods of farming and increase 

 the productiveness of the soil, it became cus- 

 tomary to pay him on leaving his holding com- 

 pensation for what remained of certain other 

 kinds of improvements which he had made on 

 or in the soil. The Agricultural Holdings Act 

 of 1875 undertook to give him a legal right to 

 compensation for some of these unexhausted 

 improvements ; but the provisions of the act 

 could be avoided by notice from either landlord 

 or tenant, and they were for that reason prac- 

 tically inoperative. The demand for a measure 

 that could not be avoided in this way led Par- 

 liament to pass the Agricultural Holdings Act 

 of 1883. This act gives the tenant on quitting 

 his holding the right to compensation for im- 

 provements of a permanent character, such as 

 buildings, fences, bridges, roads, orchards, per- 

 manent pastures, the reclamation of waste 

 land, and water-works, if made with the con- 

 sent of the landlord; for drainage, if made 

 after the landlord has refused to make it ; and 

 for several other classes of improvements, 

 mostly applications of fertilizers, whether made 

 with or without the consent of the landlord. 

 Compensation is fixed by agreement, arbitra- 

 tion, or the court, on the basis of the value of 

 the improvements to an incoming tenant. No 

 compensation is given for u what is justly due 

 to the inherent capabilities of the soil," and 



each award must specify " the several improve- 

 ments, acts, and things" for which compensa- 

 tion is awarded. Most of the provisions of the 

 act can not be avoided by notice or by contract. 

 This legislation has gone very far in the direc- 

 tion of completing the revolution of the old 

 law of fixtures. The landlord's right of dis- 

 tress was abridged by the act, and he can now 

 distrain for only one instead of six years' rent 

 as formerly. The rights of the landlord have 

 been restricted by other measures. The Ground- 

 Game Act (1880) gives the tenant the concur- 

 rent and inalienable right to kill all the ground- 

 game on his holding, and any contract waiving 

 that right is incapable of enforcement at law. 



There are, however, demands for additional 

 legislation that will still further guard and in- 

 crease the rights and interests of the tenant 

 and limit those of the landlord. Among these 

 are the abolition of the right of distress, and 

 the giving of fuller security for labor and 

 money invested by the tenant in improvements. 

 That the tenant may be encouraged to adopt 

 the best methods of farming and develop the 

 utmost capacities of the soil, it is claimed that 

 any work or operation, including the results of 

 good farming, which adds to the letting value 

 of the holding, should be included in the im- 

 provements for which he has an inalienable 

 right to compensation, and, that the landlord 

 may not appropriate any of the value of these 

 improvements by arbitrarily increasing the 

 rent, judicial rents are necessary. The Farm- 

 ers' Alliances of England and Scotland have 

 undertaken to secure for the tenant-farmers 

 of both countries full compensation for all im- 

 provements, fixed rents, and free sales of their 

 interests, and a bill for these purposes was in- 

 troduced into Parliament at its last session. 

 The landlords strongly object to this system of 

 dual ownership, which would greatly restrict 

 their rights, depreciate the value of their prop- 

 erty, and discourage their investing more money 

 in land or in improvements, while many states- 

 men oppose it on similar grounds, and because 

 it would interfere so much with the long-rec- 

 ognized rights of property, and lead to num- 

 berless legal controversies on account of the 

 difficulty of properly guarding the rights and 

 interests of both parties. The question whether 

 the sums of money that such a measure would 

 prevent the landlord from investing in im- 

 provements would be more than counterbal- 

 anced by the money and labor it would lead 

 the tenant to invest in such improvements has 

 been much discussed. 



Ireland. In Ireland the laws relating to the 

 ownership, transfer, and descent of land, are 

 practically the same as the English laws, and 

 reforms similar to those already described have 

 been advocated. To facilitate the sale of in- 

 cumbered property, the Incumbered Estates 

 Court was established in 1848, with power to 

 order, on the petition of the creditors, the sale 

 of an in cumbered estate, and give a simple, 

 indefeasible title ; all statutes, settlements, and 



