148 
Contemporary  Agricultural  Law. 
act  on  behalf  of  his  co-lessee.  The  very  recent  case  of  Bush  v. 
Taccus  (Times,  21  Dec.,  1909)  is  a very  important  decision  on 
the  right  of  a tenant  to  plough  up  grass  land.  The  defendant 
was  a yearly  tenant  of  215  acres  of  land,  of  which  53  acres 
were  arable  at  the  commencement  of  the  tenancy.  In  1895 
the  tenant  sowed  22  acres  of  the  arable  with  grass  seed.  In 
1901  he  broke  up  9 acres  of  this  and  grew  wheat  on  it,  and  in 
1902  he  again  sowed  it  with  grass  seed,  and  so  it  remained 
until  the  last  year  of  the  tenancy.  In  1909  the  tenant 
received  notice  to  quit  and  claimed  payment  from  the  land- 
lord for  the  grass  laid  down,  and  threatened,  in  case  of  refusal, 
to  plough  up  the  laftd.  The  landlord  then  commenced  an 
action  for  an  injunction  to  restrain  him  from  so  doing  on  the 
ground  that  the  defendant  threatened  to  commit  a breach  of  the 
covenant  against  committing  waste  or  spoil  pr  ploughing  up 
pasture  land.  Mr.  Justice  Eve  refused  the  injunction,  holding 
that  land  arable  at  the  date  of  the  agreement  and  for  many  years 
previously  had  not  become  pasture  land  within  the  covenant, 
because  the  tenant  had  in  subsequent  years  left  it  for  a con- 
siderable period  in  grass.  He  also  held  that  the  threat  to 
plough  up  the  grass  did  not  involve  a breach  of  the  covenant 
to  farm  the  land  upon  the  most  approved  system  of  husbandry. 
An  act  which  would  not  have  been  a breach  of  this  covenant 
if  the  tenant  was  not  under  notice  to  quit  could  not  be 
converted  into  a breach  by  the  service  of  the  notice  to  quit. 
This  decision  is  in  accordance  with  the  general  opinion  of 
tenant  farmers,  who  consider  that  their  liability  under 
covenant  or  custom  not  to  plough  up  pasture  or  meadow 
land  only  extends  to  such  land  as  was  in  that  condition  at  the 
commencement  of  the  tenancy.  A tenant  may,  therefore, 
under  a threat  to  plough  up  grass  land  seeded  at  his  own 
expense,  indirectly  compel  the  landlord  to  compensate  him 
therefor  at  the  expiration  of  the  tenancy,  though  the  Agri- 
cultural Holdings  Act,  1908,  gives  him  no  compensation  for 
laying  down  permanent  pasture  unless  the  previous  written 
consent  of  the  landlord  has  been  obtained. 
4.  Rating.  Green  v.  Newport  Union  (1909,  A.C.  35  ; 
78  L.J.K.B.,  97)  is  an  important  decision  on  rating  law.  A 
sea  wall  had  been  constructed  for  the  purpose  of  protecting 
various  farms  from  inundation  by  the  sea,  and  rent-charges 
were,  by  a local  Act  by  arrangement,  imposed  upon  some  only 
of  the  farms  protected  for  the  pui’pose  of  maintaining  the 
works,  although  these  also  benefited  the  remainder  of  the 
farms.  The  Court  of  Appeal  refused  to  allow  the  deduction 
of  any  part  of  the  rent-charges  so  imposed  in  arriving  at  the 
rateable  value  of  the  lands  on  which  they  were  imposed, 
considering  that  the  rent-charges  did  not  in  principle  differ 
