The Agricultural Holdings {England) Act, 1875. 147 
and exhausted. Nor will the point arise at all — at any rate it 
need not arise in any separate form — under claims made against 
limited owners, because, the question there being what addition, 
if any, has been made to the letting value of the holding by the 
improvements, their want of repair or good condition will be 
one of the elements to be considered in settling this question. 
It is obviously for the tenant's interest that they should be in 
proper order when he surrenders his holding, for he will then 
reap the full benefit which the Act contemplates, while he will 
avoid the uncertainty and annoyance which must arise when a 
point of this kind has to be decided by umpires or referees. 
As the tenant is entitled to payment from the absolute owner 
of " the sum laid out " on the improvement, less a proportionate 
part for each year during the period of exhaustion, it follows that, 
when the claim arises, the landlord can raise no question upon 
the economy or extravagance of the particular outlay. It may be 
that a tenant has spent more money than he need have spent had 
he used the proper means, or set about the improvement in the 
most economical method ; but the landlord cannot dispute the 
amount ascertained and vouched for as having been spent by the 
tenant. Under these circumstances, when asked for his consent 
to an improvement of the first class, the landlord will probably 
think it necessary to couple that consent with a limitation of the 
sum to be spent upon it, or of the pc^iod during which com- 
pensation can be claimed ; or he will require that the work 
shall be executed under inspection. As will presently be seen, 
another principle is applied to compensation for second- and 
third-class improvements, and the landlord is protected by the 
words of the Act against any undue expenditure upon them. 
As to Improvements of the Second Class. — These improvements, 
though not permanent, are durable, and, unless the referees think 
j the improvements are exhausted when the tenancy determines, 
or will be exhausted before the maximum period mentioned in 
the Act, the tenant is entitled to compensation for them for 
seven years following the year of tenancy in which his outlay 
is made (§ 6). Second-class improvements are six in number, 
specified as follows (§ 5) : — 
1. Boning of land with undissolved 4. Claying of land. 
bones. 5. Liming of land. 
2. Chalking of land. 6. Marling of land. 
3. Clay-buming. 
Thus, if one of these improvements be made at any time 
during the year of tenancy ending Michaelmas, 1876, the seven 
years begin to run with the next succeeding year, and the claim 
to compensation will cease after Michaelmas, 1883. But, as 
L 2 
I ^ . 
