340 AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS 



in the northern part of Nottinghamshire, and in the West Riding 

 of Yorkshire. In some of these regions the system was not 

 giving very good results. In Surrey, the custom of tenant-right 

 was said to be " promoting an extensive system of fraud and 

 falsehood among the farmers." The custom seems to have 

 been quite loosely formulated in that country, and it was possible 

 for the farmers to " work up a quitting," as it was called, 1 and 

 thus defraud the landlord or the succeeding tenant. Not being 

 properly regulated the " compensation " often embraced " large 

 payments for imaginary improvements and alleged operations, 

 which, even if they had ever been performed would be more 

 injurious than beneficial." 2 



But while the custom of tenant-right was very imperfect 

 in its operations in some parts of England, the principle on which 

 it was based was sound, and in time it was to be embodied in the 

 laws of the land. The custom of tenant-right struck at the 

 very heart of the tenant problem. It guaranteed to the tenant 

 just returns for his investments, without involving the many 

 disadvantages of the long-period lease. The experience of the 

 landlords and tenants of Lincolnshire had already proved that 

 where the system was properly regulated the custom of tenant- 

 right was satisfactory in practice as well as sound in principle. 



In 1850 a bill was introduced in Parliament which aimed 

 at the embodiment of this custom of tenant-right into a law. 

 It was entitled "A Bill for the Improvement of the Relation 

 between Landlord and Tenant in England and Wales." Its 

 purpose, as stated in the preamble, was to insure to farmers 

 compensation for properly constructed, permanent improve- 

 ments. The idea of enacting a law of this kind was not new 

 in 1850. Two hundred years before, Walter Blith advised that 

 a law be enacted " whereby every landlord should be obliged 

 . . . to'give him [the tenant] reasonable allowance for his clear 

 improvements." The bill of 1850 did not pass, but neither did 

 it die. Again and again similar bills were brought before Parlia- 

 ment, and in 1875 an act was passed, which laid down the 

 conditions for compensating the outgoing tenant, but unfor- 



1 Caird's "English Agriculture in 1850 and 1851, p. 119. * Ibid., p. 119, 



