144 The Agricultural Holdings {England) Act, 1875. 
when originally made, but in its state of greater or less ex- 
haustion at any time, not exceeding twenty years, when the 
tenancy may end. When the Bill was first introduced, letting 
value was the basis of compensation applicable to the estates 
both of absolute and limited owners. The principle was retained 
in the case of limited owners in the interests of the remainder- 
man, so that upon coming into the estate he might not be 
iboand by any engagements of his predecessors in title, to 
"which engagements he had been no party, unless the property 
was really benefited by the outlay. Tenants must remember, 
therefore, that in dealing with a limited owner they have not 
the same security for unexhausted improvements as they possess 
in dealing with an absolute owner. In the latter case, the 
tenant will receive back the capital he spends, either in money 
or in kind, — in kind so long as his holding lasts ; in money 
when the holding is determined, if the improvement is found 
to be unexhausted when the claim arises. In dealing with a 
limited owner, he will still receive back, during the tenancy, 
what the land or occupation yields to him in kind for the im- 
provements he has made ; but at the end of the tenancy, 
instead of receiving back the amount of his outlay, less a pro- 
portionate part for each year up to the period of exhaustion, he 
must prove that the letting value of the holding is increased by 
this particular improvement : his compensation in money depends 
upon the additional rental which the improvement will yield 
in the remaining years during which it will be deemed to con- 
tinue unexhausted. 
The extent to which the improvement adds to the letting 
value of the holding is to be decided, in case of dispute between 
the parties, by the referees or umpire, for whose appointment 
provision is made in the part of the Act relating to procedure. 
It will be for them to ascertain, not what is the present letting 
value, because that may be increased by other circumstances, 
such as the construction of a railway or the growth of a 
neighbouring urban community ; but how much of the increased 
letting value, when the farm falls in, is due to the particular 
expenditure for which compensation is claimed. It will be 
for the referees or umpire also to decide, in the words of § 7, 
what is "the capital sum fairly representing" this addition. 
Let us assume that the additional letting value due to the im- 
provement is ruled to be 10/. per annum, and that the improve- 
ment has ten years to run before it is exhausted. Will the 
capital sum "fairly representing" this additional rent be ten 
times the amount, that is, 100/.? or will it be the present 
capitalised value of an annuity of 10/., terminable in ten years? 
It may be assumed that the latter rule will apply, and the sub- 
joined Tables show that the sum allotted to the tenant upon a 
