Tke Agricultural Holdings {England) Act, 1883. 
37 
Special provision is made (§ 17) for cases arising under 
3, 4 and 5. If, in these cases, tenants claim under the 
Act, the substituted compensation is to be awarded bj the 
referees or umpire for anv improvements provided for in the 
three sections, " if and so far as " this substituted compensation 
" can, consistently with the terms of the agreement, if any, be 
ascertained ;" and the award, " when necessary," is to distinguish 
such improvements, and the amount awarded for them, and is to 
be subject to appeal like other awards under § 23. 
The object of § 23 is not clearly expressed, but it appears to 
be mainly framed with a view to make awards under §§ 3, 4 
and 5 correspond as far as possible in form and substance with 
all other awards, so that they may give rise to no difficulties on 
appeal. We have seen that there may be no agreements under 
§§ 3, 4 and 5 ; or there may be agreements relating to one or 
two classes of improvements, and not to others ; or the compen- 
sation claimed may be, in part, compensation directly under the 
Act, and, in part, substituted compensation. In order, there- 
fore, that the award may, on the face of it, convey all the 
particulars which may afterwards be essential for the informa- 
tion of the parties or of the County Court on appeal, the sub- 
stituted compensation, if possible, is to be ascertained and to 
form part of the award. If there be an agreement, the referees 
or umpire may not be able to ascertain what the substituted 
compensation really is, "consistently with the terms of the 
agreement," which may contain reciprocal conditions not easily 
appraised in monev. On the other hand, this appraisement 
will be easy if, as in the case of current tenancies, the right to 
substituted compensation arises under custom or statute. The 
substituted compensation when ascertained may be a lump sura. 
It may not always be necessary to distinguish the improvements 
for which it is given, as, for instance, if no question arises upon 
them ; but, " when necessary " — that is, if the dispute turns 
upon the amount due in respect of these improvements, or if the 
other items of claim require that each shall be separately 
assessed — then the lump sum must be distributed, and each 
improvement must be credited with its proper share, as is 
required under § 19 in awards generallv. 
This construction of § 17 is not free from doubt. It may be 
contended that, as it is imperative on the referees or umpire, 
" when necessary " to distinguish the improvements and the 
amount awarded for them, the effect of the latter part of § 17 is 
to authorise the referees or umpire, " when necessarv," to set 
aside the agreement if they cannot ascertain the substituted 
compensation payable under it, and to award in respect of each 
improvement as though no agreement had been made. This 
