The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1874-11-12
VOL. ".

ninth instant. rCpleS 70 our last hrLlcLe on
usuTy; but as It makes no new point, and
does not successfully controverk the posi-
tions assumed BY Us, We do not think that
another reply is demanded. If the TEE
graph had presented any new arguments OF
facts, then the importance Of the subject
would require an answer or admission
Statesman.
There was no new point necessary to be
made, and as TO our having controverted
successfully the position assumed BY the
STATESMAN, that is q matter Of opinion.
Stripping the question Of all minor consid-
erations. and coming down to the only real
| Issue In this discussion about the usury law,
will the STATESMAN inform US il dollar
cannot be held as property just as an anvil
is held as pFoperty9 And If 80, what rea-
son is there or can there be for denying the
right to sell the dollar for what it will
bring. Just as the anvil may be sold, even il
the law does say a dollar has q specific
valuel If eight, or ten, or twelve pei
cent. may be had, why not twenty-hvel-
Houston Telegraph.
We will answer the Telegraph. A dollar
can be held as property just as an anvil
but there the similarity ceases. An anvil is
not medium Of exchange. If the editor OF
the Telegraph viii put an Gnua in Oae pocket
and a dollar in the other, and go to
the market or a store and offer to buy meat
or vegetables, and then pay for them with
the anvil, he will find out the difference
between 1t and the dollar. The answer
then, in short, is that the one is a
medium Of exchange, the other is not.
Anvils should be priced according to
supply and demand. Money, which is
the medium Of exchange and the representa-
tive of values, and issued by authority of the
Iaw-making power, should be guarded and
protected from high rates or sales. The
one represents all kinds of property, and is
given universally, except in cases of barter,
in exchange, and is, therefore, necessity,
not only with the blacksmith, but the mer-
chant, the editor, the farmer, mechanic and
laborer. Men, generally, can do without
anvils, but they cannot do without money.
It therefore follows that that which is ne
cessity, q sine qua non, in the transaction OF
the business of life, should be guarded
against exorbltant rates, so that the labor.
ing-man may have the benefit of the ex-
change without giving an undue proportion
of his daily earnings for its use. He can
not carry anvils in his pocket and give
them in exchange, but he can cary dol
lars. The merchant, farmer, lawyer, doctor
and laborer will readily take the dollar fol
-, o,,1 okI,a, ,,roort,y b1,f =, "a
the anvil. Whyl Because the one is rep
resentative of all property, the medium Of
exchange, but the other Is not. The one,
therefore, should be left to supply and de-
mand, the other should be hedged in and
protected from high rates. The anvil may
be sold for what it Will bring, but, unless
bartered, it must be sold for the dollar ol
dollars. If then the purchaser should have
to pay an exorbitant rate of interest in one
locality and not in all, the anvil would sell
for less in the one than in the other, and the
law of supply and demand would yield tc
the pressure of high rates in the medium
of exchange. Again, the price Of
the anvil is not regulated by law
but the value of dollar is, and the value
of all other property is estimated by the
quantity in market and the proportion which
the aggregate bears to the aggregate amount
Of the circulating medium.
Just as well ask why should not the blood
drawn from the living animal be sold fol
what it will bring as well as pound Of
flesh. The one is absolutely necessary tC
the life of the animal, but the pound Of
flesh is not to the dead. Money is neces
sary to the life of trade, but an anvil is not
Therefore, in order to make trade flourish
cheap money should be secured by legisla
tive enactment. When corn and foddei
are abundant, our horses and cattle ar,
kept fat, but when scarce they are lean
When money is cheap, trade and manufac
tories flourish, and the material resources
Of the State are developed but when scarc'
and rates high, they languish.
Again, if the rates Of money are high
and it is invested in the ordinary pursuit.
Of life, the masses must pay more for thel
neeessaries. 1t is therefore evident that ther
is a great difference in property in an anvi
and in money, and that the license granted
in the sale of the one should not be sx
tended to the other.
Let us present case for the sake of illus
tration. Suppose that the governmen
should furnish certain quantity of waite
to State or community, according to th'
public exigency. Now, should one man b
allowed to take advantage of the necessit.
OF his neighbors, buy up the water and re
fuse to let them have it, except at an ex
orbitant ratel Yet the water would be a
much his property as an anvil, if he owned
one. So the public necessity must be con
suited in fixing the interest at which none.
may be loaned.
Much more might be said on the subject
The laws Of God and man might be in
voked to show that usury has been con
demned wherever and whenever the rate
were oppressive and disproportioned to th'
amount Of property represented, and thl
necessities Of the people.