MESNE PROFITS. The value of the prem ises recovered in ejectment, during the time that the lessor of the plaintiff has been il legally kept out of the possession of his es tate by the defendant : such are properly re covered by an action of trespass, qua/re claus uni fregit, after a recovery in ejectment. Osbourn v. Osbourn, 11 S. & R. (Pa.) 55; Bacon, Abr. Ejectment (H); 3 Bla. Corn. 205.
As a general rule, the plaintiff is entitled to recover for such time as he can prove the defendant to have been in possession, pro vided he does not go back beyond six years; for in that case the defendant may plead the statute of limitations ; Hare v. Fury, 3 Yeates (Pa.) 13, 2 Am. Dec. 358 ; Bull. N. P. 88. The vaiue of the use of land during the time it was unlawfully detained by a lessee is the proper measure of lessor's damages; Roach v. Heffernan, 65 Vt. 485, 27 Atl. 71. In an action to recover mesne profits, plain tiff may either prove the profits actually re ceived, or the annual rental value of the land ; Worthington v. Hiss, 70 Md. 172, 16
Atl. 534, 17 'Atl. 1026. Defendant in eject ment cannot free himself from liability for mesne profits by permitting a third person to remain in actual possession; Vicksburg & M. R. Co. v. Lewis, 68 Miss. 29, 10 South. 32. Exemplary damages are allowed In trespass for mesne profits, only when the defendant has acted maliciously or in bad faith; Her reshoff v. Tripp, 15 R. I. 92, 23 AU, 104.
The value of improvements made by the defendant may be set off against a claim for mesne profits; Wood. L. & T. 1390; but prof its before the demise laid should be first de ducted from the value of the improvements; Hylton v. Brown, 2 Wash. C. C. 165, Fed. Cas. No. 6,983. See, generally, Wash. R. P.; Bacon, Abr. Ejectment (H); 2 Phill. Ev. 208; Adams, Ej. 13.