The Agricultural Holdings {England) Act, 1875. 
145 
settled estate will usually be less than that which he will receive 
where his landlord is absolute owner. The exception will be 
where the outlay has been so judicious and so remunerative as 
to create an improved rental equivalent to over 8 per cent, upon 
the cost of the improvement (see Table C). For every lOOZ. 
laid out by the tenant upon first-class improvements, his claim 
against an absolute owner will be as follows, supposing the 
expenditure to be made during the year of tenancy, 1876-7, and 
assuming also that the improvements are found to continue 
unexhausted during the maximum period specified in the 
Act : — 
Table A.* 
Compensatioa j Compensation 
Year. 
due. 
Year. 
due. 
1877-8 
.. .. £95 0 
1887-8 
.. .. £45 0 
1878-9 
.. .. 90 0 
1888-9 
.. .. 40 0 
1879-80 
.. .. 85 0 
1889-90 
.. .. 35 0 
1880-1 
.. 80 0 
1890-1 
.. 30 0 
1892-3 
.. 25 0 
1882-3 
.. .. 70 0 
1893-4 
.. .. 20 0 
1883-4 
.. .. 65 0 
.. .. 15 0 
188-1-5 
.. .. 60 0 
1895-6 
.. .. 10 0 
1885-6 
.. .. 55 0 
1896-7 
.. .. 5 0» 
1886-7 
.. .. 50 0 
Upon the estate of a limited owner, the tenant's claim for 
every 100/. laid out upon first-class improvements, made at the 
same period, will be ascertained, first, by fixing the addition 
which this expenditure has made to the letting value of the 
holding, say 5Z., and then capitalising this sum at the number 
of years' purchase during which the improvements were unex- 
hausted. If the period of unexhaustion be twenty years, then 
the result will be as follows : — 
Tablk B. 
Year. 
Compensation 
Year. 
' ' Compensation 
duo. 
due. 
1877-8 
.. .. £60 0 
1887-8 
.. .. £35 0 
1878-9 
.. 58 5 
1888-9 
1879-80 
.. .. 56 0 
1889-90 
.. .. 28 15 
1880-1 
.. .. 53 15 
1890-1 
.. .. 25 0 
1881-2 
.. .. 52 10 
1891-2 
.. 21 5 
1882-3 
.. .. 50 0 
1892-3 
.. .. 17 10 
1883-4 
.. .. 47 10 
1893-4 
.. .. 14 15 
1884-5 
.. .. 43 15 
1894-5 
1885-6 
.. .. 41 5 
1895-6 
,. .. 2 10 
1886-7 
.. .. 37 15 
* These Tables are" from Mr. Winch's Treatise on llie Act (Stevens and Sons), 
but a (lifierent view of the Compensation Chiuscs of the Act is taken in this 
Paper, and limits the use of tlio Tahles. 
VOL. XII. — S. S. L 
