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