194 History of Local Rates
have a number of differentiations for different kinds
of expense. The greater harmony of interest which
might be secured by this method would be dearly
bought by the complications of finance which it would
introduce. Different classes must put up with trifling
discrepancies in particular cases of expenditure if they
get equality on the whole. The question is, then,
whether one single differentiation should be applied to
the whole of the ‘beneficial ” expenditure, and in
attempting to answer it the best plan seems to be to
assume a flat rate to start with, and ask what case
there is for partial exemption.
Railway lines (not including stations, sidings, &c.)
and canals (not including wharves, &c.) should be
entirely or almost entirely exempted,! inasmuch as
they add nothing except, perhaps, a. very trifling
expense for police to the cost of localities through
which they run, and receive no benefit from local
expenditure. Stations, of course, are in quite a
different position. The existence of a railway station
always adds considerably to local expenditure, and
the local expenditure benefits the owners. The case
for agricultural land is not ‘so strong, though it is
also in some measure a good one. In a purely rural
district the agricultural land causes all the local
authority’s expense for ‘ beneficial” purposes. and
gets all the benefit that results. To give it a partial
exemption can make no difference there. But there
are few, if any, purely rural districts, and in most
mixed districts of a stationary character it is fairly
! This is, of course; intended to indicate the general principle. It
does not mean that existing lines-should all receive the exemption
without any equivalent being exacted,