148 The Agricultural Holdings (England) Act, 1875. 
in the case of first-class improvements, the landlord's liability 
will not necessarily continue during the seven years. It 
will depend upon the period of exhaustion as found by the 
referees. In the Act the rule applicable to the tenant's compen- 
sation for second-class improvements (§ 8) follows, with the 
exception of one important word, the rule laid down in the case 
of first-class improvements made under an absolute owner. For 
the latter class of improvements the tenant, as we have seen, is 
entitled to the sum laid out " by him, less a proportionate 
part of this sum for each year after the improvement was made 
up to the period of exhaustion. But a tenant's claim for second- 
class improvements can only be for " the sum properly laid out" 
by him, with a proportionate deduction for each subsequent 
year during which his occupancy continues and the improve- 
ment remains unexhausted. The words " properly laid out 
will no doubt give considerable employment to the valuers, and 
in disputed cases much may be said in deduction of the claim. 
The language of Section 8 will not permit a landlord to dispute 
the propriety of the particular kind of improvement. Proof 
that the tenant has spent his money will be proof of the neces- 
sity of such an improvement and of the title to compensation 
for it. But the landlord may seek to reduce the claim on the 
ground that too much has been done ; that the work of boning, 
chalking, marling, &c., has been injudiciously carried out, or has 
proved partially ineffectual through want of proper skill or car«. 
The reason why it is competent for the landlord under § 8 
to question whether the sum spent by the tenant has been " pro- 
perly laid out " is probably to be found in another distinction 
drawn in the Act between the two classes of improvements. If the 
tenant chooses to make a second-class improvement he need not 
obtain the previous consent of the landlord, and may establish a 
conditional claim even contrary to the landlord's express wish. 
All he is bound to do (§ 12) is to give the landlord notice not 
less than one week and not more than six weeks beforehand of 
his intention to make the improvement. This notice gives tl^e 
landlord the opportunity in ordinary cases of inspecting the 
work done, and of seeing that it is properly done, though the 
Act provides no machinery for such supervision. The notice 
also gives the landlord the opportunity of at once stopping the 
improvement by giving the tenant notice to quit, because there 
is an express provision that the tenant can no longer claim 
compensation for second-class improvements executed after 
receipt of notice to quit (§12). A previous written consen"^ 
from the landlord would dispense with the necessity for noti 
of intended improvements by the tenant ; or landlord and tenant 
may, by mutual consent, make a special contract within the Act 
defining the work to be done and the amount of conqicnsation. 
