Orleans independent standard. [volume] (Irasburgh, Vt.) 1856-1871, 1870-11-01

oily was of little or no force, and we
must give it its true value. There
are more farmers that lend money
than there are that pay interest upon
it. 1t is a SANDER on the farmers OF
Vermont that they are generally bor-
rowers of money; it is not in accord
ance with the facts in the case. There
are multitudes of small lenders in the
State, and we say to them you must
not take more than six per cent, and
at that rate the Shylocks borrow 1t
and relend it at a much larger rate.
The law is now evaded in almost
every instance, and we ought to pass
this bill to put the rate somewhere
near what money is worth.
Mr.. Bull of Hancock asked if the
farmers, the laborers, the seamstres-
ses, and, according to the gentleman
from Royalton, almost everybody is
lender of money, who are the bor-
rowers?
Mr.. Drake said the men in the far
west.
Mr.. Buel of Middietown said if we
pass this bill it will at once raise
the rate to s per cent, and thereby
we shall drive the money borrowers
out of the State, where they can get
money at per cent, or even lower.
He was opposed to the bill as oppoS-
ed to the true interests of the State.
Mr.. Bartholomew of Washington
moved to lay the bill on the table,
to enable the House to take up h. 80,
which leaves the rate Of interest I'M
restricted.
Mr.. Beaman of Poultney, said this
is a mere question Of political econ
omy, and we should discuss it dispas-
sionately and candidly; and not at
tempt to force the matter without re-
ceiying all the light possible on the
subject.
Mr.. Grout Of Barton, said it was
, matter Of no consequence which bill
was considered first. 1t seemed to
be the object of certain ones to over
turn the whole matter in regard tC
f interest, and establish a new order
} of things. He insisted upon an i'm
: mediate disposal Of the w.ole subject
under both bills, aud not Prolons
the consideration Of the subject long
: er than this afternoon.
: Mr.. Bartholomew did not wish Il
: defer the matter in She least, bu
e some wished to consider h. 81 first
1 and he hoped they might be gratiiiet
: in their desire.
Mr.. Smith Of Shrewsbury, move
that the bill be dismissed.
l. Mr.. Sladc of ALiddlebury. demand
:. ed the yeas and nays, which wer
t. taken as follows; ayes IA nays =
So the bill was dismissed.
0 The House then proceeded to cor
:. slider
. II SO, relating TO interest, an
:. rate legal when agreed to in writing.
O Mr.. Wood of Fairhaven, said thi
r is an exact copy of the law in Mass
D chusetts, and that the operation ofth
d law in that STATE had worked in pra'
e tee to lower the rate of interest.
Mr.. Carpenter of Burlington, wis
T. ed to show the consistency Of tn
% House in allowing the State Treas
o Ter to borrow 100000 at I 3-10tI
per cent, ard then restrict the poop
10 Of the State to 6 per cent. II
IS thought it very much like man wi
to asked blessing on his dinner whe
he had pork on the table; and loo
D. ing out of window saw his hogs
Y the garden. and said to his Irishma
lie 'run and drive these cussed hogs OF
ID OF the garden" What, what, So,
~ the Irishman task blessing on
he small piece of pork, and then tul
st round and cuss six or eight who
IN hog5w He then cited instance
lie, where the law as it now stands {
ep our statute books is a hardship in
Of practical workings among the peopl
ny By allowing the Treasurer to borro
% at I 80 per cent. we virtually s.
ID to the world that We cannot get mo
Or ey at 6 per cent. He hoped son
D bill would be passed that would I
OF lieve the people, both borrowers al
nd lenders.
in Mr.. Grout Of Barton, was oppos
H. to this bill. He thought consisten
rs a jewel when a principle was invo
is ed. But in this case there is no pr.
W ciple involved, and hence there is
II inconsistency. He said the ar fme
nd as to the operation Of the law in VI,
in sachusetts tending to reduce the ra
'e- to per cent. was not borne out
ed practice, for our State Treasurer
.ce compelled to pay 7 $40 per Gel
ed among the Massachusetts capital:
ry to obtain the loan we authorize h
es- to negotiate. The argument as to t
vs. money being allowed to go into t
at market like other commerce is I
, ? tenable, in that any man can raise
, corn, cats, potatoes aud their co
lp- mOdities; whereas money is OF
or made and put in circulation by I
/, general government, and all we C
do ind vidually is to gather togctl
in as much Of it as we can. Verne
of is only an agricultural State, and MI
ms remain so, from the fact it is too
ich from tide water to enable our peog
ing to engage successfully in manuf
lures. Agricultural interests cam
in afford to pay more than 6 per ce
CHI. interest, and when we let down t
is {; bars entirely, we thrust at the larg
interests Of our State. He hoped t
list. bill would not pass.
ler Mr.. Hinckley, of Chelsea, disagree
hts with the gentleman from Barton,
G. to his statement that money is a 4
M nopoly, He thought money was pr
Sc, ty generally distributed among t
sal people, and was not monopolized
xa- any man or class of men. He hor
mo this appeal was not made to prejud
70, the farming interests against the m
OF camille and other interests ofthe Sta
the We are all interested together in
I'm welfare of the whole, and no class
VS. terestS or monopoIies should be
lowed to influence our actions in
b. gard to the agricultural interests
IAN the State. He thought there v
lie great force in the argument of
on | gentleman from RurIinptoD tbo+