Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1845-1854, 1850-06-17
For the Portage Sentinel.
Jnterest-ItS Justice Considered.

tereSt, In reference TO the law OF Onlo re-
Gently passed, legalizing and enforcing the
payment Of ten per cent. interest, where it
has been agreed on by the parties-and as
connected, also, with the claim recently al
lowed and paid by President Taylor's Cabi-
net-the noted Galphin case. The Legis-
lature of Ohio, no doubt, mistook public
sentiment when passing this law legalizing
ten per cent interest, and it is not strange
nor unusual for Legislatures to make such
mistakes. Ibelieve every Legislature does
SO. Every Legislature passes laws destin-
ed soon to be repealed, as not the will of the
people, and many unjust laws are submit
ted to quietly-not repealed that in justice
ought to be repealed-for the people best
love quiet. They do notlike opposition, ex-
citement and agitation, to remove trifing
evil. It is only palpable and grievous
wrongs that they are disposed to resist.
This ten per cent. law, however, it is
supposed, will be productive of good, as it
excites discussion on the justice of interest.
1t begins to be questioned whether interest
is euer just. 1t is contended that it is on
ly labor that produces--that money Of it.
self produces nothing; and that if the bor-
rover repays the money, the lender is made
good. Certainly. the lender can, in strict
justice, require no more than pay for his
trouble, his labor of transferring the money
from one person to the other, and the risk:
if any. Anything more would be tax on
labor for the aggrandizement of capitalists.
This payment of interest has been the
ruin of the fortunes of millions, as out Of it
grow exhorbitant rents, and every kind of
exhorbitant profits by which property hold.
ers are ever fleeing the laboring poor. But
the wrong in the ten per cent. law consists,
not in allowing people to contract for and
recover ten per cent, but in its arming the
creditor with the physical power of the
State to enforce the payment, even by the
penalty of exposing the property of the debt
or to forced sale, at any sacrifice. 1t is GER
tainly enough for the money lords that they
have the money, and can keep it, or can let
it to those only on whose engagements they
can depend to fulfil promises without the
penalties Of forced sales. That law is like
too many other laws made by the represent
atives of the people, so called. Its apparent
design is, eto protect mot 'the weak against
the strong'-no! but to protect the strong a.
gainst the weak-to protect those who need
no protection-or, rather, to aid the strong
to oppress the weak. And already, learn,
the Shylocks are getting their bonds, their
Judgment bonds, printed, in blank, to con-
form to the new law, to enable them on ev-
cry renewal of note, to get the ten per
cent. fastened on their debtors. The debt
ors, poor fellows! they will hate to be sued
and distressed Immediately, and may, there
fore, to put far off the evil day, submit to
the charge of ten per cent. But they had
better beware. Pay day will come, and
| with it the money must be forthcoming, or
else-what?-n the pound of flesh,' per-
haps, but the products of days, weeks and
months of hard toll. 1t is, indeed, too bad.
Ofthat Galphin claim, for interest on an
old debt, the principal Of which had been
paid years ago, it is plain to me that, if in
terest is just on just debt, of few years
standing, it is on an old debt. Therefore,
if the principal was just charge against
the United States, the interest is, (though l
do no not admit either,) although it had
run for more than 70 years.
We have parallel case. The old Vol
unteer company from Portage county, in
1912, commanded by the then Capt. John
Campbell, were entitled to one years pay
at least, up to July, 1913. But they receiv-
ed but six months pay until near 20 years
thereafter. The second six months pay was
not paid to the members of that company
until, think it was December, 1929, when.
at per cent interest, the original debt would
have nearly doubled. So that a private OF
the company then receiving about 70 dol
lars as pay and rations for months, sho'd
have received also about the same amount
as interest on that sum. And not receiving
that interest until the lapse of 10 and two
thirds years, it would again double, so that
at this time, if interest is a just charge,they
would be entitled to about two hundred dol
lars each, as interest on the six months
pay that had been deferred, say l63 years
after the time it should have been paid.
Now, it appears to me, if interest is just
charge on principal, it is equally just on
interest, and if it sjust to charge interest
annually, it is also just to charge it semi
annually, and equally so to charge it on the
interest deferred, as on the principal defer
red. And, if it is just to charge interest Sc
miannually, why not equally so to charge
4 Ill, IL :