Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1817-04-08

place bo wortl. more tisn The lesal inter
est established Tor that period or place, is
no; Legal regulation then obviously un-
I Just, ia requiring il TO be lent for a consi-
deraiion less than by the terms of the
i,roDosition II Is worth, or otherwise not
TO be empio,ed In the business of loan at
ali, except with The hazard Of imeurriug
legal pcnailiss? Legal regulation on the
subject ninst, therefore, in all cases in
which il IS moi conlessedly superhuons
aud nugatory, he necessarily unjust as re-
CARDS the lanier or proprietor of money.
Its Injustice is equally indispu,able with
respect 70 these who'may have occasion
toborrow. For, either the operation Of the
law, by reason of the artificial impedi-
mcnts II creates, prevents altogether this
descrptionof persons from obtaining, by
means of loan, the money they may lave
occasion for, on the terms on which (hut
Tor the Interference OF lis operation they
would have been enabled TO obtain il; or.
II must have the effect of rendering the
terms on which it is obtained harder, and
the price paid for ii higher, by The amount
OF the consideration which must be exact
ed FOR leSalriSk aud odium. incurred in
the manner and from the considerations
which have alreaiv been demonstrated.
he restraints of the law involve besides
an understandable Interference witt, res
pect to iie exclusive discretion. which
every man has the right TO exercise. in re-
latlon to subjects and concerns ola cha
racter exclusively personal. and Nv whose
results, no other interests than his own
are 10 be affected
1t would appear, then, from the review
which has been attempted 10 be taken OF
the subject, that the provisions of the ex
'stng law for the restraint of th, evils
Of usury, are founded in superero-
saiion that III their principle and ope-
ration, they are arbitrary aud tyranni-
cal that III respect of their more particu-
iag features and sanctions, thew offend "a
gain.,t important maxims ofinrisprudcnce
and morality that their original is TO be
traced to conceptions, and q period oc the
most rnquesiionai'le ignorance and bar
harl'y; that they are undoubtedly inef-
fectna' t. their direct object, the suppress
sion or mitigation OF the miscliiers of IL
Snry ; that their real operation is in 40
grsvatIon OF those mischiefs. which # is
f,ielr protested purpose to repress; that
they involve an inherent indefeasible cha
racteristic of inc consistency aud absurcii-
ty: aud finally, that their operation is ac
conipanied with an effect ofincyiiable and
complicated injustice. An immoral eff
tect IS furthermore the result of the exam
pie which they exhibit of tie unchecked
and unpunished violation and contempt
OF the laws of the land and the authority
Of ;!r legislature.
~ tie conclusions, which have been
oeeiaceG ~ relation TO this subject, that is
certainly the most important & sat;sc,c
tory in lis character, which goes TO ev;nce
that The unavoidable effect of'the oncrati-
on OF legal restraints, for the purpose Of
lowering or keeping down the rate OF in.
feresf OF money and of REFRESHING the
mi,IciieiS ofusury, is TO enhance that rafe
ana 10 aSgrayate those mischiefs. If the
business OF tins conclusion should appear
10 be roo obvious Gas is supposed TO be the
iactl 10 admit OF being made question.
ali further controversy on the subject is
clearly at an end. 1t is a corrollary foo
from this conclusion, that the enterta;n,
ment OF an opinion favourable TO the dis
continuance ofthe legal restraints mon.
usury, furnishes no evidence of any sen.
timeHto OF tolerance, but is tiirecfevidence
tthe most conclusive inits character. off,
sentiment OF hostility to this practice. in
fheeXcesS TO which it has been RECENTLY
carrIed-so Justly the object of execr,ti-
on ana opprobinm. To tile accusation
on merifIng the character of the advocate
800 ." consequence OF me OPINIONS
favourable to the removal of the s,lbs;st-
ing legal restraints upon it, which | have
aVowed, II such an accusation were 10 he
made, would vindieate myself in the
words OF an illHstrious man. written r,ore
tian two hundred years ago" If il be
objected, (says Lord Racon,l that th;S
what he had been advancinc) doth in -
ny sort authorize usury, which before was
~ some places bat permissive, the answer
Is-tliat tits better To mitigate usurv bv
declaration, than 10 suffer it TO race bv
connieance." ~
But, i.the force of the various argu-
menis which have been ad,lnced fo p
vince the iutility and mischief oflegal re-
SiTalnt and regulation in relation TO ns,lrv
Should be denied. still he fact does mot
admit OF dispute of the prevalence (co-
iemperancously with Tie existence of tbis
regulation aud restraint ofusury in the
most unprincipled form aud 10 the most
enoTmousand extravagant extent. When
no effects can result, therefore from fine
abrogation ofihe legal restraints of worse
character. and tendency, than those which
are experienced i'll co-existencc viii, i
Tie arguments certainly deserved fo he
accounted irresistible I'm favour of file ev-
pertinent of repeal.
ANTIFGNERATOB.
coMMgNIcATrD.1
fSnchngiam, AprlE IN. 1917.