The Economy of Local Rates 197 
The conclusion is that, so far as the expenditure for 
what are called * beneficial” purposes is concerned, 
the case for the present system—with or without some 
modification of the existing differentiations between 
different tlasses of property—is extremely strong. It 
is much weaker on the side of the expenditure which 
is made not because if serves the enlightened self- 
interest of the ratepayers, but because they regard it as 
their duty, or because the national government compels 
them. The historical explanation of the origin of rating 
for these purposes is no justification of its continued 
existence. The conditions have entirely altered since 
poor relief was put on the rates in the reign of 
Elizabeth, and even since education was put on the 
rates in 1870. Such present justification as there is 
consists in the general belief that a certain amount of 
local management is desirable in the provision of these 
services; that local management will be too lavish 
unless the funds which it administers are drawn from 
local sources; and that rating immovable property 
is the least objectionable form of local taxation. On 
the other hand, the system of raising money for these 
purposes by local rates on immovable property is 
unsatisfactory, because (1) it everywhere places a cer- 
tain burden on immovable property while exempting 
other sources of income, and (2) because this btirden, 
though it exists everywhere in some small measure, is 
very unequal as between the different localities. 
The first of these two faults is not very serious, and 
need not detain us long. It must be admitted that 
it 18 not desirable to tax immovable property for 
of small houses: if so, there is already the beginning of such a 
differentiation as is succested above.