Vandalia Whig and Illinois intelligencer. [volume] (Vandalia, Ill.) 1832-183?, 1833-04-24
VANDALIA:
"Wednesday, April "a, 1888.

The Ne,o Indian War, so strongly appre.
hended by some of our northern neighbors. is
like to go by without ''bloodshed.' The Ga
lenian contradicts its own statemen ex
cuses the circulation of false reports by the aid
of an apology very convenient for news-makers,
that previous rumors are not confirmed. The
Alton Spectator of the 10th says, he is inform
ed by passengers from the upper country, that
there is not the least ground to apprehend In
dian disturbances, and that The report of their
assembling Sin force" on Rock River is totally
untrue. The same paper also says (and we
have similar intelligence from other sources)
that the report that Mr.. Dixon had abandoned
his home, is untrue; and that Mr.. Dixon de-
cares himself that he has not for moment felt
the least apprehensive of war; 1t will be mat
ter of great congratulation to our readers no
doubt, that the clouds of darkness which began
to gather on our horison, threatening a terrible
storm, have so soon passed away. The face
Of the sky" however, we apprehend, has not
deceived many: the intelligent farmer, we
trust, notwithstanding the hasy atmosphere, has
not failed to "plant and to sow" IN due season
many of his contemporaries will be who at
tempt to "raise the wind" in another way.
"A writer in the last Alton Spectator has
taken the trouble to notice an article which APP
peared in the Wing some time since, upon
the 'usury BILL" and has bestowed upon our
remarks much more attention than we thought
they were deserving of. We make no objection
to his structures; we should rather take pleas
ure In seeing our arguments scanned and our
errors exposed, if the writer who attempts to do
so, will but deal Justly with us in assigning a
motive for what we say. The correspondent
Of the Spectator represents us as making an
effort ''to render odious" his favorie usury
law, "to bring its authors into disrepute aud
finally pervert its salutary influence How
evr courteous and candid the gentlemen may
be in other parts of his essay (for it is quite a
labored effort he certainly here does us injus
tice. We endeavored especially to guard against
such an Interpretation, and, whenever we al,
luded to the trainers oflhe law, to speak ofthem
and their intentions in most respectful terms.
We observed that the usury bill was favoriie
measure with the members from the north, and
with all their ability, they probably did but
obey the known will Of large portion of their
constituents. We asserted nothing sdisrepu-
table, to any member, much less to that par
tcular member who reckons himself among
the friends of the Spectator, ifhe have no di-
rect control over its columns; and we think it
would be difficult for any person not disposed
to be captious, to make "black white and white
black to put such construction Oh our LAM
guage.
But Notwithstanding the light derived from
the essay of the Spectator and the arguments
there urged pro and con. the usury question,
we are still of the same opinion as to its propri-
ETY.; the writer urges no very convincing rea~
sons why we should change.
The first consideration which the writer ur-
ges in support of his favorite scheme is derived
from supposed similarity between it and other
provisions IN our statute books of which no bo-
body complains. Were we to be satisfied With
this kind of argument, and admit every meas
urc as just and of general utility whenever we
could trace in it some resemblance to previous
enactments, no absurdity in law or morals
could be brought forward too garing to meet
our appreciation We should not have to go
far back in the history of legislation to find
precedents Of laws the most futile and contents
ible, or tyrannical and oppressive. And yet
our essayist seems entirely satisfied with this
single reflection, as though it were amply sutii-
Gent to answer his purpose; and enquiries OF
the murmuring usurist, with confidence that
denies contradiction, "Does it Ohe law not
impose similar restraint upon other classes Of
society? To the tavern-keeper, to the ferry
man, has il not said, so much you may demand
for your services and no more?" If the an
swer were in the affirmative, it would be but
poor reply to person complaining of mani