Saint Paul weekly Minnesotian. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1858-1859, 1859-04-16

times the opportunities for making money
were greater in Minnesota than elsewhere. SO
in proportion were the temptations for run
ming in debt greater here than in any other
State in the Union. The prosperous times
made US vastly enterprising, only to leave as
vastly embarrassed. We do not suppose we
will be accused of wilful desire to lesson the
credit of the State when we assert that our
people are not now and will not for some time
be able to pay off the original principal of their
debts.
The simple question then is, should this
state of things be aggravated by a demand
for an extortionate and cruel rate of interest,
unprecedented in the history of the world,
and which to pay implies pecuniary sui
eide
The wealth of State consists in its labor
ing population. These, "when once destroy
ed can never be supplied" and these it should
be the duty of our laws, nay Of our whole
people to protect. It was these which con-
verted the wilderness into towns and farmed
fields, and without these our State would
once more relapse into the desolation of ma
ture Drive away the farmer and the citi-
zen, close the fertile womb of the productive
earth, discourage industry and effort among
the poor, and though the money lender may
enjoy carnival your cities will be desert pla-
ces and the grass will grow in your mar
kets
How is the money pressure already been act
ing upon us The farm is sold under mort
gage, given probably to obtain the original
purchase money for the United Suites the
the farmer cannot remain in the community
that once knew his prosperity and now wit
ness his downfall. He removes, in most cas-
es from the State his improved property
passes into the hands of some nonresident
money-lender the fences are torn down by
trespassers; the fire-weed grows in the plough
ed field the State has losta valuable citizen
and the grain market, the crops of one farm.
Has not this process, been going on over the
whole State
Should the evils here depicted be increased
or rather should not our judges seek to allie
viate the miseries of the people, not alone
for humanity's sake, but on grounds of public
policy, and in consideration of the interests Of
the Commonwealth intrusted to their care
We need not detail at length the decisions
from time to time made by the highest legal
authorities of England and this country, in
which contracts against public policy have
been declared void. The whole subject is
treated of at length in Strongs Commentaries
on Equity Jurisprudence, Vol. 1. Pc. 262-
3O4. Weneed only say that the whole law
ON the subject may be thus condensed-gov-
ernments are instituted for the protection Of
the people laws are made to regulate this pro-
lection under these laws contracts are al
lowed but when any set of contracts are
made which strike directly at the main source
of all, at the main reason of all at the whole
people, and tend directly to their injury and
destruction, laws and governments must both
rise up against them and drive them FORTH
1t was this view that induced the judiciary Of
Holland, during the crisis which followed the
great tulip excitement" to declare the wild
contracts made for the purchase at immense
sums of those worthless flowers, null and
void, as opposed to public policy and likely to
bring universal ruin on the people. Does not
the same argument apply to this State
Not that we would seek to set aside legal
and binding contracts where they exist. But
we think there was no doubt the five per
cent clause was not part of any legal contract,
and could only be sustained by straining the
law. Let us examine the question:
In the first place it must be understood,
that mere promise on the part of one party
is not a contract The old adage, "it takes
two to make bargain" explains the law, for
the law is or ought to be but common sense.
1t takes two to make contract If A. says
to be B. 1 will deed you such and such a piece
of land, A. may do it or not as he sees fit.
But if B. says to A. will give you 5000 for
such piece of land, and thereupon A. says
will deed you such piece of land, it becomes
contract, for the promise of B. forms con-
sderation for the promise of A.
This distinction is a plain one. at is es
sential to the validity of contract that it be
founded on sufficient consideration. "--Kents
commentaries, vol. 2, p. 592. And again,
from the same authority: "Therc must be
something given in exchange, something that
that is mutual, or something which is an in
ducement to the contract. And still farther
IA contract without consideration is nu-
dunn pactum and not binding in law''-and that
too whether it is in writing or verbal.
What could be clearer than this? Now
let us see what Promissory note is: A.
owns $780, B. needs 500. A. says to B.,
81 will lend you 800 for 6 months, provided
that in consideration of my giving you that
length of time to use the money you will give
me two per cent. per month for it, during that
time" B. agrees to do this, and Promissory
Note is drawn to put all this in writing
What does that Promissory Note express
Why that B. owes A. 100, that A. has given
B. six months to pay it in, and that B. in con-
sideration of the delay agrees to pay per
cent. per month during that time. Nothing
could be palmer the money lent is the con-
sideratlon of the principal to be returned
the interest to be paid is the consideration Of
the delay given. So far so good; here is pro-
mise for promise-consideration for conside-
ration. But now we come to the anomaly
After this Promissory Note, perfect in itself,
comes in tail-piece; a fag end; an after-clap,
as Hudibras callsit; jointed to the original,
and which like the parasite upon the oak over
shadows and covers that which supports it..
1t is in this wise: Together with interest
after ma tr,rifv tho yo to of Hyo INV oon& ~,,.