English Land Law. 
373 = 107 
lent had he used the proper means, or set about the improve- 
ent in the most economical method ; but the landlord cannot 
spute the amount ascertained and vouched for as having been 
)ent by the tenant. As, however, the landlord's consent must 
' asked before an improvement of the first class can be made, 
' can always protect himself by limiting the sum to be spent 
3on the improvement, or the period during which compensa- 
on can be claimed ; or he may require that the work shall be 
cecuted under inspection. As will presently be seen, another 
nnciple is applied to compensation for second- and third-class 
nprovements, and the landlord is protected by the words of 
,e Act against any undue expenditure upon them. 
As to Improvements of the Second Class. — These improve- Improvements 
ents, though not permanent, are durable, and, unless the 
iluers think the improvements are exhausted when the tenancy 
;termines, or will be exhausted before the maximum period 
entioned in the Act, the tenant is entitled to compensation 
r them for seven years following the year of tenancy in which 
s outlay is made. Secojid-class improvements are six in 
imber, specified as follows : — 
1. Boning of land with undis- 
solved bones. 
2. Chalking of land. 
3. Clay-burning. 
4. Claying of land. 
5. Liming of land. 
6. Marling of land. 
Thus, if one of these improvements be made at any time 
iring the year of tenancy ending Michaelmas, 1876, the seven 
>ars begin to run with the next succeeding year, and the claim 
compensation will cease after JMichaelmas, 1883. But, as 
I the case of first-class improvements, the landlord's liability 
)es not necessarily continue during the seven years. It depends 
TOO the period of exhaustion as found by the valuers. In the Duration of 
ct the rule applicable to the tenant's compensation for second- ^ 
ass improvements (§ 8) follows, with the exception of one 
laportant word, the rule laid down in the case of first-class 
nprovements made under an absolute owner. For the latter 
ass of improvements the tenant, as we have seen, is entitled 
■ "the sum laid out" by him, less a proportionate part of this 
im for each year after the improvement was made up to the 
mod of exhaustion. But a tenant's claim for second-class 
nprovements can only be for "the sum properly laid out" by 
im, with a proportionate deduction for each subsequent year 
irmg which his occupancy continues and the improvement 
mains unexhausted. The language of Section 8 does not 
,;rinit a landlord to dispute the propriety of this particular kind 
improvement. Proof that the tenant has spent his money is 
