B. There should be a just proportion between the insurance premium and the risk. This depends not only on the style of building of the houses themselves and of those in the neighborhood,[237d-5] on the situation, the too great intricacy (_Complicirung_) of which extends the ravages of fire, as its too great isolation makes assistance difficult;[237d-6] but also on the nature of the business carried on in them,[237d-7] and on the condition of the local development of fire police. Highly cultured places, especially large cities, are really much less exposed to damage from fire. To not take this into account would be not only to compulsorily dole out charity to the poorer classes of the people, and to the less cultivated portions of the country,[237d-8] but it would indirectly put an obstacle in the way of a transition to the massive construction of houses, and of good, that is, as a rule, of costly fire-extinguishing institutions.[237d-9] On the other hand, administration must be rendered much more difficult by the taking of risks of many degrees of danger, especially as it is scarcely possible, for a long time, to even hope for a statistically unassailable basis of a tariff graded in exact accordance with the risk.[237d-10] If those objects especially exposed to danger should be excluded altogether, the common utility of the institution would be largely diminished; and the insured least exposed to danger would nevertheless have to complain of a relatively too high contribution.[237d-11] If every peculiar class of risks were to be treated as one whole, the insuring principle itself would suffer.[237d-12] Where the nation or municipality engages in the business of compulsory insurance, its too rigid system of rate-fixing has something inequitable in it, inasmuch as it makes the most provident housekeeper suffer from the danger from fire of his neighbor's establishment, a gas factory, for instance. C. The certainty of compensation for damage suffered. The government should see to it that the institution does not promise more than it can perform with its joint-stock capital and by means of its premiums.[237d-13] The good will of foreign institutions to keep their promises to the letter is best assured by requiring them as a condition precedent of carrying on their business in a country, to bind themselves to litigate only in the home courts. They protect themselves against the risk of very large insurances by the system of re-insurance, by transferring a portion of the premium as well as of the risk to one or more other insurance companies.[237d-14]