THE LA W OF SETTLEMENT OF LAND, 283 



be improvement that will make a due return for the 

 outlay, such as a reasonable tenant will be willing to 

 pay interest upon during his term, and such as wUl 

 pay both landlord and tenant. Less than 5 per cent 

 cannot be considered as a fair return for the outlay 

 on such improvements, which are often buildings 

 more or less perishable. If they wlU not pay that, 

 they are fancy improvements, which wealthy men 

 with a taste for land improvement, and residing on 

 the estate, may make, but which really proceed from 

 motives nearly or wholly independent of the tenure. 

 Such an improvement as cottage -building may not 

 pay 5 per cent; though even that, by economy of 

 cost, and by adding a larger garden than usual to the 

 cottage, may be made to approach it. The indirect 

 gain from good cottages, in securing better labourers, is, 

 however, large. There is much more than Is. a week 

 difference between a good labourer and a middling 

 one ; a gain in this way of Is. a week, besides the 

 usual rent, will make a cottage pay well. 



Is there any difficulty, therefore, in a tenant for 

 life making improvements that will pay 5 per cent on 

 the outlay ? I believe the difficulty is very small — 

 so small as to show that views of settlements hinder- 

 ing outlay on improvements are unsound. The very 

 hypothesis is, that the improvement to be made is a 

 valuable one, paying 5 per cent on the outlay. It is, 

 therefore, clearly right that the tenant who gets the 

 benefit of the improvement should pay 5 per cent on 



