The Greenville enterprise. [volume] (Greenville, S.C.) 1870-1873, 1871-01-25
Usury.

Usury.
Perhaps no question of more vi
tai importance to the entire peo
pie of the State will be brought be
fore the present Legislature, than
the Bill to repeal the Act of 1866
repeating the usury laws of this
State. With great difficulty, and
after numerous eloquent demon
strations of the golden fruits which
would flow steadily into the State
but for the usuary laws, the AcI
was repealed. That none of these
expected benefits have resulted
every one will admit. On the
contrary, it is believed generally,
that our condition and prospects
have been damaged by the change,
and that under the present system
of interest, we can never enjoy
general prosperity. This is our
decided opinion. We are an ag.
ricultural people, and enjoy no
superior advantages of soil or eli.
ma'e e over our sister States, where
the value of money is regulated
by law. Can our farmers pay the
present rate and realize pr oft
.n the products of their farms p
Is it not apparent that the entire
profits of the farmer are swallowed
up in the cxactions of the capital.
list, and the real wealth and pros.
peri:y of the State are not in
creased9 1t is contended, if the
present law be repeale |, money
cannot be had, and the wheels of
trade will be obstructed. The cir.
culation of money depends not so
much on the rate per cent. as the
security afforded for its 'ean.-
p.~rlS-tnvesr IN United States
bonds, at seven per cent, rather
than loan to us at twelve or twenty
per cent, and in fact every one
will suspect those who apply at
high rates. We think it far bet.
ter to begin our operations on q
small and sure scale, adding our
savings annually to the side of
production, than for years to keep
up the appearance of hollow and
artificial prosperity. Under the
present system, we may labor and
strive and sweat, season after sea-
son, but to find that We are poor
still. and t at al! our hard earnings
60 abroad to the enrichment of the
capitalist. Does the present law
benefit the merchant? If yea,
then the greater the reason for it's
repeal. 1t the me: chant operate
on capital borrowed at twelve to
twenty per cent, then he must re-
alize, as profit on his sale, this per-
centage over and above his leei
innate profits. This must come
from the farmer, who is the con.
sumer, and in this way large
amount is substracted from the
channels of production and trans
ierred TO the foreign capitalist to
the impoverishment of the State.
1t may be said that in some cases
-" A." by borrowing money at
twenty per cent. can realize a
profit, but tliis is an exceptional
case and proves nothing, for in
nineteen out of twenty cases, the
borrower will reap pecuniary ruin.
If he be successful, is not success
at the expense of some citizen in
distress and to the injury perhaps
of the State? 1t may be again
said that he, who ventures at a
ruinous percentage and loses, has
only himself to blame; but is it
not trne that the ruin~of any indi.
vidual is detrimental to the gene
raj prosperity, inasmuch as the
State is but a collection of individ
nals. The present law is, in few
words, a protection to the rich and
powerful and an oppression to the
weak and poor and, in fact, at no
period in the history of the State,
would the repeal of the usury
laws have operated greater detri.
ment than at the time it was effect
ed. An individual, in failing cir
cumstances, borrows with Difficult
ty and only at ruinous rates, but
If general prosperity prevails
around him, he may by this means
save himself and re. establish his
credit; but when the entire peo.
pie of a State are reduced to com.
parative poverty, it's wealth and
standing must be the fruits of ere.
ative industry. At such time
there is q disposition to borrow
and keep mp appearances without
any real progress in wealth. Such
is our condition to-day. The State
is poorer than in 1866. Money is
not more plentiful than at that
predicted manufactures
are failures, and it must be evident
to every thinking man, that as
farmers, we cunnot prosper on
a