If the tenant for life makes a lease reserving rent and dies before the day the rent is due, the rent is apportioned, and his personal representative can recover the amount due when the lessor died.24 The common-law rule was otherwise, however, until the statute of 11 Geo. II. c. 19, § 15.

22 Thomas v. Thomas, 17 N. J. Eq. 356; Cogswell v. Cogswell, 2 Edw. Ch. (N. Y.) 231; Hunt v. Watkins, 1 Humph. (Tenn.) 498; Mcdonald v. Heylin, 4 Phila. (Pa.) 73; Barnum v. Barnum, 42 Md. 251. If he fails to pay the interest, he Is liable to the remainder-man for any damage suffered. Wade v. Malloy, 16 Hun (N. Y.) 226. The life tenant must also pay taxes. Jenks v. Horton, 96 Mich. 13, 55 N. W. 372; Watkins v. Green, 101 Mich. 493, 60 N. W. 44; Bone v. Tyrrell, 113 Mo. 175, 20 S. W. 796; Disher v. Disher, 45 Neb. 100, 63 N. W. 368; Chaplin v. U. S., 29 Ct. Cl. 231; Varney v. Stevens, 22 Me. 331; Patrick v. Sherwood, 4 Blatchf. 112, Fed. Cas. No. 10,804; Fleet v. Dor-land. 11 How. Prac. (N. Y.) 489; Johnson v. Smith, 5 Bush (Ky.) 102. But see Cochran v. Cochran, 2 Desaus. Eq. (S. C.) 521. But he is entitled to contribution on assessments for permanent improvements. Reyburn v. Wallace, 93 Mo. 326, 3 S. W. 482; In re Bradley's Estate, 3 Pa. Dist. R. 359; Bobb v. Wolff, 54 Mo. App. 515; Moore v. Simonson (Or.) 39 Pac. 1105. Cf. In re Wy-att's Estate, 9 Misc. Rep. 285, 30 N. Y. Supp. 275 (insurance premiums).

23 Foster v. Hilliard, 1 Story, 77, Fed. Cas. No. 4,972; Hunt v. Watkins, 1 Humph. (Tenn.) 498; Daviess v. Myers, 13 B. Mon. (Ky.) 511. Cf. Stevens v. Melcher, 80 Hun, 514, 30 N. Y. Supp. 625. The tenant's share is found by computing the present worth of the interest payments which he would have to make during the probable existence of his life according to tables of mortality. The Carlisle tables are generally used. Abercrombie v. Riddle, 3 Md. Ch. 320; Bell v. Mayor, etc., 10 Paige (N. Y.) 49; Foster v. Hilliard, supra; Atkins v. Kron, 8 Ired. Eq. (N. C.) 1; Swaine v. Ferine, 5 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 482; Cogswell v. Cogswell, 2 Edw. Ch. (N. Y.) 231. But see note to Estabrook v. Hapgood, 10 Mass. 313; Dorsey v. Smith, 7 Har. & J. (Md.) 345, 367. There was formerly an arbitrary rule that he should pay one-third, and this seems to still exist in South Carolina. Wright v. Jennings, 1 Bailey (S. C.) 277. Cf. Brand v. Rhodes' Adm'r (Ky.) 30 S. W. 597.

24 Borie v. Crissman, 82 Pa. St. 125; Price v. Pickett, 21 Ala. 741. At common law there was no apportionment of rent. Clun v. Fisher, Cro. Jac. 309;. Rockingham v. Penrice, 1 P. Wms. 177; Jenner v. Morgan, Id. 391; Norris v..

§37)