180 History of Local Rates 
of the immovable property in the locality. The self- 
interest of the locality is regarded as served by action 
which tends to maintain or raise the value of the 
fixed property. Expenditure out of rates receives the 
name of “ beneficial,” if its direct effect is sufficient to 
more than counterbalance the opposite effect of the 
addition to rates, so that in spite of the addition to 
rates, it tends to cause an actual rise in the value of 
immovable property, while expenditure out of rates 
which depresses the value of immovable property, is 
called ““ onerous.” ! 
To some it appears that local self-interest so eon- 
ceived cannot work towards the general good. They 
know that the object of public expenditure should be 
to benefit the persons, present and to come, of whom 
the community consists at present and will consist in 
the future. Therefore, they argue, it is obvious that 
the object of the public expenditure of a locality ought 
to be to benefit the inhabitants of the locality. Dut, 
paradoxical as it may appear at first sight, this is not 
at all true. The public expenditure of each locality 
ought to be directed to tire benefiting of all the per- 
sons composing the whole community in the present 
and the future, and an attempt on the part of each 
locality to benefit its own particular inhabitants, 
regardless of the interest of the owners of the fixed 
property of the locality, will not, as is rashly and 
1 Sidney Webb, Grants in Aid, 1911, p. 88, is entitled to the credit 
of pointing out that this is the true interpretation of * beneficial” 
and “ onerous” as commonly applied to rates and expenditure. The 
« paradox ” which he finds in it, however, disappears if we remember 
that those who use the words in this way identify the “locality ” 
with the ultimate local ratepayers. Mr. Webb identifies it with the 
inhabitants” or * people of the district.”