The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1870-12-15
Il PLANTER ON UsURY LII us.
TO TIE EDITOR OF THE NEWS.

~ IbE EUIIOR Ot The NEWS.
Your timely article in reference to the bill OF
Mr. wilkes's to re establish the usury laws merits
thorough consideration. To men Of limited means
this question is vitally Important Such men can
hardly obtain the necessary loans under existing
laws Their dflculties are not unappreciated,
and, In order to relieve them, 1t Is gravely pro-
posed that they shall be prohibited from paying
more than half price for what they so much need.
or the author OF this bill, l propose to say very
little His motives are, doubtless pure. His
brief public career wo- Id seem to indicate that he
is very good man ard very bad fnancer. To
those who take the trouble to examine 1t, this
whole question of usury is very simple. But the
great majority, even Of intelligent aud rejecting
men, have evidently not examined 1t al all. They
seem to think that although money Is, indeed,
only one OF the many forms Of property OF value,
that 1t Is value OF so peculiar and unique nature
that it is governed by special laws OF Its OWL and
that it is not subject to the same principles WHICH
regulate and control all other forms or wealth..
This one fundamental mlsconception underlies
all the errors which delorm legislation ana per-
pleX practice in reference to this subject. IL ap-
bears to be not sufficiently understood that money
Ia nothing more than the representative OF value,
in its most general and abstract form. II does
not indeed; represent rane In any OF It's concrete
shapes OF bonds, stocks, provisions, &C., and YET
all OF these values are represented anu measured
by IT, in certain sense. and fof certain purposes.
In short IL comprehendS al othe. values, but Is
comprehended by none. And thls. us pecullar
capacity OF at once representing all values, ana
vet, at the same tlme representing no particular
species of values constitutes the peculiar value
the special utility OF money aSeU. Take from It
this essential and dif1erentiattng characteristic,
and it would no longer he money. 1t might stu be
value but 1t would not be value IN lnat most COM
ivn mn
forms called money. Having stated very lmper-
fectly but trust, as far as concerns the present
question, not altogether inadequately, the respect
in which money differs from all otne' ..1rnis .:
value, would ask, what Is there in the nature OF
money as money! What is ther. in this particular
species Of the genus scealh, that removes 1t from
the sphere and influence OF those laws WnlcI
direct and control all other forms OF wealth !
Why should the price Of money not be regulated
by the great law OF supply and demand, IKE tne
price OF al other commodities? why snouitl
the law declare that money is worth ouly
half of what it will sell for, and -that
every thing else Is worth the whole Oh Wnat
1t will sell forf What Is the criterion or measure
Of value that demonstrates this anomaly Why
should corn be scarce and costly, and money pe
scarce and cheap2 Is there any Inherent proper.
ty or characters, ic OF money tnat makes TINS
slate OF things either eNpedient or just? II mo.
ney has any such unfortunate pecuiiarty, what
is It? Let it be pointed out. IL can be safely
mentioned thar, as far as the purposes OF com
merCe are concerned, money IS pTeClse1i ou par
with all other commodities. IL Is worth lis mar
Eet vaIue-neither more nor less.
The general correctness OF the principles mere
mentioned Is 50 manifest that II Is presumed
neither Mr Wilkes nor his supporters would nn
der:aEe 10 dispute them. But While admitting thell
general correctness, they would. doubtless, seeS
justification for their proposed violation In the pc.
culiar circumstances which surround our State al
present. They would, perhaps, argue very mucl
after this fashion: We nave just passed througn
destructive war; our people are poor, oppressed
by debt. taxation, &C., and cannot afford 10 pay
tie high rates OF interest now current; Whlct
rates Of interest ha would also, perhaps, contenC
were not the result OF a scarcity 0f money or ol
the precarious nature OF investments but or col
lusOn on tie part Of those who have money &c
lend Admitting, for arguments sake that OIL
Of this Is true IL might be very perinenly asked
why the corrective legislation should be restricted
TO one article. Corn lnd many other articleS o.
prime necessity have been very clear Outing a.
most the whole OF the i've years Juss past. NY wy
should not their value also be fixed by law? Tc
this lC would not be competent To repy that Tie
necessaries OF life are very different from money
and that people are compelled TO nave mem III
any price IN order 10 llve AMI thal oeslues t!i'
colusion, and consequently FICTITIOUS prices, /
impossible In resnecJ 10 then, because the mar
kets I lie world are open TO ns. For all thlS
true or money. Money is bread TO thousands, ant
we are as free 10 borrow In the money narhets VI
the wUrli as we are II bay IL Its provision mar
Hets. Much could be said In Illustration OF the
eXpedieucy as we'll as Injustice OF this species o.
| legislation contemplated by this bill. Facts and
| logic alike condemn all restrictive legislation IN
reference TO commerce; wide, Ricardo, Mill
| Saw, &c.)
cupied too much OF your valuable space. Mt
| Wilkes Is friend OF the people bnt he is .
friend who II let alone, will Kill them with kind
ness. AGHlCoLA.
Darlington, s. c., December, 1870.