326 CONSUMPTION OF HAY AND STEAW. 



icUh stock on tlie farm all the hay, straw, and clover groicn thereon, and 

 containing as it did no provisions as to straw vnconsamed on quitting, 

 was not inconsistent with the custom of the country, and that therefore 

 the pUiintiff was entitled to be paid for it. The action was brought to 

 recover £13 10s. from the incoming tenant, according to the custom of 

 the country, for the value of straw left by the plaintifip, the outgoing 

 tenant, at Michaelmas, 1854, on quitting the occupation of two pieces 

 of land, leased by one Flanders to the plaintiff. The lease contained 

 covenants by the plaintiff that he would cultivate the farm according to 

 the custom of the country, and that "he should with the last wheat crop 

 lay down the same with 20lbs. weight of good clover-seed per acre, and 

 continue the same so laid down for feeding, not to exceed three gi'ounds 

 belonging to the farm ; and should and would during all the said term 

 consume with stock on the said farm, all the hay, straw, and clover 

 grown thereon, which manure sliould be used on the said farm: and 

 that the said iSmith Flanders, his heirs and assigns, should and would 

 allow the said Ellis Muncey to occupy half the rooms in the house and 

 the barn-yards and granary until Midsummer day after the expiration 

 of the said term, if necessary, to end the cropping of the said Ellis 

 ]\Iuncey grown on the said premises thereby demised." The defendant 

 objected that evidence of the custom of the country (Cambridgeshire) 

 was inadmissible ; but the under-sheriff decided that he would admit it. 

 The custom was proved to be that when an incoming tenant pays for 

 straw and manure, he is paid when he goes out : when the dung belongs 

 to the landlord, the incoming tenant pays for the thrashing, dressing, 

 and carting to market, and has for that the straw, chaff", and colder; but 

 when the dnng belongs to the tenant, then the straw is valued by the 

 ton at a consuming price. 



On taking possession of the farm, the plaintiff had [»aid for the ha}', 

 straw, and manure according to the former valuation, and on his 

 leaving the farm the straw was valued by a person named by the 

 defendant, who admitted that he agreed to the valuation "if it was 

 lawful." "Ending the cropping" was explained by one of plaintiff's 

 witnesses to mean the hiirvcstiug and thrashing out of the corn, and 

 so turning it into straw ; but not consuming the straw. The plaintiff 

 had a verdict for the amount claimed ; and a rule for a new trial on 

 the gi'ound that the lease excluded the custom of the country was dis- 

 charged. Pollock C.B. said: " I'lie defendant's contention was that 

 by the lease the plaintiff v.as bound to consume all the straw, and not 

 to leave any, and that th'.refure he could have no right to be paid for 

 any which he did leave. But we think this is not the meaning of the 

 clause. The meaning is that no straw shall be removed off the pre- 



