The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-01-26

the House on this question any other time.
1t seems to me the law on the subject of interest
in this State is one of the very best that could
be enacted. which provides for contract rate of
8 per cent OF course, if there is plenty OF
money to be had it can be borrowed at per
cent But just as soon as a 6 per cent law is
passed money would leave our State, and instead
of such measure assisting the poor man he
would be unable to borrow money at ALL / am
opposed to the amendment
Mr.. Reeves-I am in favor of getting as low a
rate as can be had, but don't believe it would
be best to pass a law reducing the rate of inter
est IN this State to 6.per cent. To say the least,
per cent is a very low rate of interest 1t is
claimed that such reduction would be for the
Deneht OF the poor man. That may be true in
one sense, but that class of men are much more
interested in the general business prosperity of
the country than IN borrowing small amount of
money at low rate of interest A reduction of
the rate from to per cent. would disturb the
business of the State. A great deal of the bust
ness of our State is done ON borrowed capital If
l thought business interests would not be
shaken by it, would be in favor of the amend
ment. do not fear reduction to per cent,
but do fear reduction to per cent.
Mr.. Kellison-I am not in favor of the amend
ment 1t would be an injury to the business In
terests of the State. There are thousands of
mortgages falling due soon, and it would be alb
solutely impossible to- renew their loans unless
the lenders could get more than 6 per cent. To
the borrowing class it would be positive injury
And while | would be in favor of reducing the
rate to 8 per cent. If it would not drive money
away from the State, yet believe at this time
it would be bad step to take. I am not quite
sure but that am in favor of letting the interest
law remain as it is at the present, or until a
higher authority than the Legislature of Indiana
has regulated this difficulty. until the $400, 000
600 of money now resting in the United States
Treasury is sent into the business channels Of
this country
Mr.. Rivers-I am in favor of this amendment
The fact is the rate Of per cent. at the present
time is not giving employment to the working
men Of this country. There is money not
loaned because the business men of the country
cannot afford to pay per cent. interest If the
money can't be loaned at per cent why not re-
duce the rate to 6 per cent? There is some rem
edy for the present business stagnation, and that
remedy is to reduce the rate to per cent.
Mr.. Rooinson-My recollection is that when
the law was changed from 10 to 8 per cent. the
same arguments were used by those who opposed
the reduction that are now being used. believe
the price of products and the price of our la
Dor have been reduced fully 2 per cent. within
the past four years, so that 6 per cent. fully
represents per cent four years ago. Money
holders do not loan unless they obtain what they
consider good collateral In justice to the labor
ing of Indiana insist that the rate of inter
est ought to be reduced. The rate of interest
has much to do with the amount of money labor
ers receive Tho farmer generally depends
upon borrowed capital If they have TO pay a
HlRu Idte OIL Interest,", IHey nave 10 pay d cor
responding low rate to their help A reduction
Will prove beneficial to the State.
Mr.. Smith, of Warrick-To do justice to the
mass of the people, let us make this reduction. l
am decidedly in favor of the amendment
Mr.. Boyd-Just at this time / think we can
reduce the rate l per cent, because Eastern
capitalists are only asking per cent. for their
money here in Indiana l think we can safely
enact a law reducing the rate to per cent, but
it would be folly to reduce it to per cent.
Mr.. Dittemore demanded the previous ques-
ton, which was seconded by the House, and
under it's operations the amendment was agreed
to by yeas SO, nays 49,
| Mr.. Fisher moved to strike out the enacting
clause, which was laid on the table and the bill
was ordered engrossed.
Mr.. Moody offered concurrent resolution to
| pay the expenses of the Governors Inauguration.
| Mr.. Dittemore moved to strike out all referring
to decorations On motion by Mr. Gooding it
was referred to the committee on claims
/ The House adjourned until Monday at 2 P. NJ.