The proprietor
o f the
ground may
diffolve the
compa&s
with a view
to fell the
ground forthe
dilcharge o f
his debts;
but i f the
crop be growing,
the f^le
mull be delayed
until it
be ready for
cutting.
difiolqtion o f it not injurious to the cultivator’ s property. (It is
otherwife where the proprietor of the ground dies after the crop has
begun to grow, and appears hire grafs,; for in that cafe the compact
is not dihdlved, as.the cultivator wppld then be injured in his property
by the diftplution of it.). In this calc the cultivator is not entitled to
any thing, for hk labour; becaufe the ufe o f a. perfon’s fervice cannot
he appreciated but, by a compact ; and when the compact becomes
null, the eftimation of the fervice no longer remains.
I t is lawful-,for the proprietor of the ground to diffolve the compact,
in cafe he have occafion to fell the ground to difeharge confider-
ahle debts which he may have incurred, for, this is a pretext, which
he may avail himfelf of, in the fame manner as in H ire*':— and in
this, cafe the, cultivator h^s HP right to claim from him. any . expence
which may have attended the. tilling of, the land, or the digging o f
drains ; becaufesfervice is not, appreciable, but, in cQnfequence o f a-
compact; and as the, price fet on the fervice, in the prclcnt inffance, was
upon the fuppofition o f a produce, it follows that upon the produce,
being prevented, thp cultivator is not entitled to any thing. If, howr
ever, the crop have begun to grow, although it,be Hill unfit, fqp reap-,
ing, the land muff not be fold for, the payment o f the proprietor’s -
debts until the grain be ready to cut do w n ; becaufe if the lands were to
be fold, under fuch a circumftance, thefale would be, injurious to the
right of the cultivator ; whereas, by waiting until the. crop is ready, it
only occafions a fmall delay in the payment of the, proprietor’s debts,
which is the lighter evil o f the two. The Kazee, muff alfo, in this,,
cafe, enlarge the proprietor, if he have been imprifened on. account o£
his debts ; for jt being unlawful immediately, to fell the, lands, the,
proprietor, in delaying to pay his debts, is guilty of no injuftice, and
impriibnment is intended,as a retribution for injuftice.
* See V»l. II,I. p, 369.
Ik
If the tèrm o f thé compaift óf cultivation Ihould expire before the Rules in cafe
crop be ready for cutting, the cultivator muft pay to the proprietor of p^a expiring
the land a hire Or rent for his [the cultivator’s] proportion ó f the before m
• 1 1 I • r , . 1 . ,, crop is ready
ground until the crop be ripe; and in the mean time any work to cut.
which it may require muft be performed by both parties according
to their refpedtive proportions. T h e reafon o f this is, that in thus
prolonging the compact, and ordaining thé payment o f a refit, a regard
is paid to the benefit and intbreft of both parties, wherefore it is
neceffary that it fhould be prolonged :— and it is alfo neceflary that
both fhould bear their proportions of the work or expencés ; becaufe
thé compadt which they entered into is expired, and the crop remains
their joint property, and in cafes of joint property the work is incumbent
on both parties, in the fame manner as the fubfiftence of i
partnerlhip flave; (It is otherwife,where the proprietor of the land
dies whilft the crop is yet green; for in that cafe it is incumbent on
the cultivator to perform the whole of the work that may be required
; becaufe in fuch an event the compaft is continued during the
remainder of its term : and it [the compaft] obliges the cultivator to
fuftain the whole burden óf the work ;— whereas, in cafe of the
term o f the compact expiring, it is no longer binding, and therefore
the cultivator alone is not obliged to perform the work.) If, therefore,
either party incur any expènce, after the expiration o f the term,
without confulting the other, or without an order from the Kdzee,
he muft bear it himfelf, as he had no right of himfelf to fubjeft the
other to any charges,
If, in the example above recited, the proprietor of the land Ihould
be defirous of taking the crop (which is ftill greën) after the expiration
of the term of the compafit, yet he muft not be allowed to do fo,
becaufe it would be an injury to the cultivator. If, on the contrary,
under the fame circumftance, the cultivator be defirous of taking the
green crop, the proprietor of the land has three things in his option;
fqr he may either pull up the crop and divide it, or he may keep it
altogether and make an' allowance to the cultivator, equivalent to his
H 2 ftiare