Lynchburg daily Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1852-1861, 1854-12-29
FOR THE vIRaISTAS.
TVN III
Repeal of the Usufy Jaws-No. 3.

Repeal OF the Usufy Baws-No. 8
Hessrs. Editors i now proceed To notice
more particularly, though briefly, the min rea-
sons urged by you in opposition 10 the present
| I'sury Law. These reasons are, | under
stund them the following LIST. Thai government
has no right to impose restrictions upon the val
ne of Money such restrictions being III them
selves odious and III dcrogation Of Those natural
rights which it i eontrnded every citizen has to
do what he chooses with his own property. 2nd.
/ That the law is constantly epdded and rioiated
with impuuty, aud i, therefore, IA drnd letter.
Bird. That the law is inconsistent in making n
/ iegai aud equitable discrimination.
As To the first, | would remark, that striking
! f,llaey runs through all the Arguments that !
/ haye ever seen on the subject. This fnllacy con
/ ssts in keeping out Of view the distinction be-
+ tween the rdfHe 81 moHeyus established by GOV
eminent impression on it, face, and the value Of
/ the of that money between man aud man.
/ NV These two things are as distinct n possible,
/ and vt they are constantly COMPOUNDED. DR..
/ Dewey himself from whom the Chamber OF Com
neIce quote, has fulton into the same confusion,
n may be seen by his language copied into their
report (-cc Jirgiaidn OF oath Noyember) He
! say~ " the practice of sury has acquired bad
mime from former aud still occasional abuses :;
| but the principle must still be II Just one, that
money in common with every thing else, is worth
what it will fetch" But the present inquiry is
not, whether the Government has stamped par
tleular piece of com at its proper saue. The
question is totally different one to wit how
much Is the uSe of that piece Of coin worth be-
tween man and man, say for year No one
ever eoutcndcd for the absurd proposition that
the law had any right 10 say how many head %
cattle, or acres of land man might be allowed
t. buy or sell for 800. But does it at all follow
that the law may not say, and does it not in fact
say, and has it not shid for centuries past in every
pnrt of the world, that if A. sell his land or his
cattle to Is. and execute his note for them, he
must be restricted Ia II certain rate of PREMIUM
his Is only carrying out the distinct idea con
neete with the word interest or use Of m0Hcy.
The rate of what Is technically called iegai inter
eSt Writes in different states of the Union, but
each one has some fixed per centunl established
as the icgW rate So far the naked right to
establish this rate Is concerned, it might be fixed
at ID a. well rs ! per ceHiHm. But, As remarked
III No. l. the experience of ages has shown that
when n certain reasonable limit is transcribed,
the borrower and the lender ARE no longer ON
equal terms-uniiorn oppression IS the result,
and the law nicrposcs To protect the borrower
from THIS oppression. suppose, for \ moment,
that allrc7trlctIon is removed and that a. CON
tracts Nth Is, 10 pay hun three per ccnt n month
on the deferred payments of his land would any
nun III his senses believe that A. would ever be
able Ia ply him VIII the profits of farming, or
any othtr business, Justify such rates 1t would
ruin Dny man who would undertake H. Just as
inevitably rs every man has been ruined who has
attempted it with your 'respcctable citizens"
And this, Think sufficiently exposes the laacy
al DIR. Dcwey's valued principle that "moncy in
common with everything else, is worth what it
will fetch.' Money will ''fetch' three or even
five per cent month III Lynchburg; but il is
not rorH II. as many poor fellow can testify
who has been made bankrupt by trying the ex
pertinent.
The second reason urged for the repeal of the
| -ury Law X, that they are so constantly evadcd
aud violated with mpanty, and are therefore be-
come n dead letter. Allow that the fnct be SO, is
that any good reason for their repeall Where
the necessity forall this Glamour about repeal, if
the law beulrrady dead letter! Does it become
men who are daily evading and violating the law
with lmpuuty, 10 plead those very evasions and
violation, as reasons for repeating the law We
hR1e had enough of humhuggery of this sort in
Virginia, with respect 10 the law against shin
pIaSierS, The people have at last come 10 their
SENSES on that subject, and have resolved to toll
cratic the trash no longer even though "rcspcct-
able citizens might be engaged in the business
And 50, trust, when they come To see that pa
per shaving shops are but cohwebs 10 catchs trug-
Cling dies, they will put them equally under the
ban.
The Hird reason is the inconsistency in the
INV III making discrimination between what is
ira and cgHt1bie nsurv. On this point, |
agrer with Won, Nessrs. Editors, and rs it is IL
bout The only one Oh which we do agree, we might
be supposed to agree rs Ia the remedy. But hero
we are WIDE apart ever. iou say, abolish
the whole law. I shy, make il more stringent
| would place the uSHrjoHs money iender, and the
HsarioaS paper ShdYr ON precisely the same foot
ing. 'lhcv are birds of the same feather, and
tltr same rules of law and equity should lac APP
piled IL both. The banks are restricted in their