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.