Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1826-07-14

I'D,
General Assembly of Massachusetts which seems Il
you, to be "frsught with good reasoning" has Just
caught my attention and but for the presumption
which the remark might infer, should save that ,hs
speech has pretensOHs 10 good reasoning us ba
ed false principles aud addressed the lowest preu
dces of the ignorant and vulgar had supposed, that
since the publication of Mr. Benafns luminous trea
tse the subject the enlightened and unpre in
all countries, bad settled in the conviction, that laws
restraining the rate of interest were least in their
original institution, mpoltc and absurd-that these
monuments oil former ignorance and prejudice are per
nitted to remain in many enlightened natons,-not
because they approx ed by the Judgment of the in
teihgeht-but, because, like the commercial policy OF
England they are Connected with a whole system OF
errors, which II is difficult once, TO remove. There
are other reasons, also, that tend the repeal
OF the usury laws, and all other of REFORM
The natural timidty and Incidence of human nature
induce even wise men 10 submit 10 and abuses,
rather than TO incur the danger and trouble of making
innovations. And that veneration Of the ignorant
every thing which is old, that universally prevails,
socrates tue errors of foreathes aud mpedeS the
march of improvement. had hoped however, that the
spirit of the age, fast correcting this dispositions and
was likely, soon, 10 relieve from The tranes of
ancient prejudice. In Massachusetts il seems, that
this work of reformation has commenced by the abo
itIon of the laws regulating the rate of interest. But
in the apprehension Of MIR. Dunlap the genius Of i'm
provcment has marched TOO rapidly and il is
cd 10 his enlightened spirit, force her TO her
adventurng steps 1t reserved for him to resist the
march of light and truth and establish the reign OF
darkness and of Let by brief analysis
of this extraordinary speech, the arguments by which he
attempts 10 effect this unnatural purpose Ii evident
from the whole tenor of his DISCOURSE that the speaker
did not clearly comprehend the question under coDsde-
raen He docs not pretend 10 discuss the general
Cples upon which the policy of laws regulating the rate
of interest have been attacked and defended but COM
mences his arangue with moral lecture against suru
and contents himself with incidentally noticing the cf-
fects OF those laws and the consequences of their repeal
Thus lie says against the authority of those who advo-
cate the repeal ousnry laws ed the experience
of three thousand years" Now this remark supposcs
a nf the trup bc
cussed, or degree OF ignorance which is scarcely
be credited Whilst it is welt knowu that usury, or more
properly interest of all kinds, prohibited by the Mo-
SAFE law II Is equally well asCertancd that the uSury
laws, as they exist in most civilized nations and
which are incompatible with the Mosaic law are com.
parativey of modera date. The first law in England
allowing interest at all TO be taken, the statute
of 37th Henry VIII. chap Q And such was the
prejudice, even at that time existing against taking
interest," that the statute afterwards repealed III
the reign of Edward ". all incres, prohibited. and fine
and imprisonment denounced against him whp should
he guilty OF securing interest Ii is evident then, That
The policy of the u-ury laws they exist, is
sanctioned by the experience OF three thousand
The orator is evidently confused. Are we TO under
stand him attacking interes-or su,-or 2s defend.
ing the the policy of the usmry laws? Is he be under
stood, wishing 10 revive in this country the dark
ot nonkish superstition and civil tyrannv-when in
England according to an eminent Jurs "interest
laid under total nterdict and az its lowest
ebb tell into the hands of the Jews and ombaTds'n Or
does lie expect by railing against usury and crtOyon
To demonstrate the prOprety of laws regulating the
rate OF interest? lie must abolish interest etogetbcr
or he must abandon authority and y reason for his
arguments The authority of the sacred Scriptures of
aristotle CATO. Cicero, &c. II IL applies at all extends
10 the prohibition of interest altogether. And man
IN tins enlightened age viii ire.s.! authority
IS sufficient TO Justify the total prohibition of interest
The prohibition of nsury in the Cid Testament was
PocG3 equation Of the Jews, and had no couuexIop
with morality. 1t was not Mr.. y. sageIy suproses
ga dictate of justice and beDevocncC to influence the
conduct OF the Jew towards one of his nation; and
pas now become universal dictate of Justice and be
nevoence TO be observed by towards all his bre-
'"ren OF tue human family But ii the dictate OF
foicy-a preccpt purely political, calculated to pre-
serve among themselves, that distribution OF property
10 which many OF their institutions were subservicnt
Mr.. d. enjoys the singular felicity of having discovered
mat all those who have taken any interest However lii
iic for the use of money, have sinncd against heayen
ana been guilty Of gross violation of moral law. Tie
an'hortS OF tie New Testament Is equally napplcable
he friends OF reform advocate the repea of the u5ury
laws To lower the rate OF interest aud prevent
torIon But says MIR. Dunlap, the New Testament
prohibits coveousnes, Cxiorou, and the love of mo
ncy, As tile root of all evil,n therefore, is sur against
he New Testament to advocate the cpeal OF the sury
laws, the direct consequence OF which will be pre-
vent ertorfton-admrable logic! Bot TO be serious
90 one who has ever yet advocated the abolition of usu
ry laws, has defended extOrtion But on the contrary
those vino have led the in this contest W h Ben
than at their head, have been disinerestcd and mag
unanimous IN their viewshave dsdained unworthy mo
ives ana bowling to the supremacy of philosophy and
OF TRUTH have devoted all their energies 10 the advance
ment OF the happiness and welfare Of man /! is SAID
that eminent philosophers in modern mes have defcn
ded the policy OF usury laws. With the exception of
Adam smith. who certainly one Of the brirhcs
ornaments OF the age IN which he lIvei there is uot
man IN modern times entitled to the distinction Of ein
ncnt philosopher, who has been found capable of advo
cahug doctrine so absurd. And with him, IT now
universally admitted by the learned in political science
% have been ut those at opinion into which
human fra,ty IS apt 70 fall. How unfortunate
for The cause of rul that should have bad so
powerful an advocate But this obsequious eviction TO
autnorIty-tns blind aCGuiescence the opinions OF
others, which MIR Dunlap has betrayed is at war with
an ImproV emeut-paraiyses the energies of man and
binds tic human mind IN eternal feueTs admire that
holiness OF spirit, which Characerses the efforts off
Benbam-that manly Independence Of opnion-fbatI
reckless defiance of the cianours ignorance and 90
puar preudce, which though may sometimes lead toI
discontinue and 10 ruin the pioneer in the path off
truth IT'S unnecessary to follow MIR Dunlap tine Fri
unpai 7cuation which he has given of the arguments
Tue friends OF reform or tire fairness with which he has
stated tl'se arguments let comparison Of his speech
th the essay Of Bentan, the champion of the cause
attest As sample Of this orators reasoning powers