208 History of Local Rates 
and the task of showing the effect upon rates of 
different schemes of grants in a comprehensive manner 
is consequently beyond the means at the disposal of a 
private person. But I have taken from the table 
printed by the Commission the first eight non- 
metropolitan unions in which the expenditure was 
below 1s.in the £ of assessable value and compared 
them with the first eight in which the expenditure 
was over 2s. The under 1s. list is Reigate, Kingston, 
Bromley, Hastings, Christchurch, Bradfield, Hendon, 
and Willesden. The over 2s. list consists of Hoo, 
Medway, Cranbrook, Tenterden, Sheppey, Rye, 
Hailsham, and Petworth. The present grants to 
those under 1s. amount to £29,112, while those over 
2s. only get £18,714. Lord Balfour of Burleigh would 
increase the grant obtained by the under 1s. list to 
£58,013, and that obtained by the over 2s. list only to 
£34,713. The scheme described above would give the 
under Is. list only £9,542, while it would give the 
over 2s. list £30,611. Lord Balfour of Burleigh’s 
total is thus £45,800 in excess of the present grants, 
while the other scheme would give £7,673 less than the 
present grants, and yet be far more equalisatory than 
Lord Balfour of Burleigh’s. It is so simply because 
Lord Balfour of Burleigh’s scheme is so much kinder 
to the owners of Bournemouth (Christchurch Union) 
and Hastings and some very prosperous London 
suburbs. 
Of course, the figures of equalisatory scale which I 
have suggested are merely illustrative. It is 
impossible to say what the actual figures should be 
until we know what services are to continue in the 
hands of the smaller areas, what are to be taken over