Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1892-02-14

found guilty OF a 5000 loan at usurious rates
and is unable to pay the fine. he goes to Jail
and stays there until 50 per day will pay
him out, which would run considerably
over two years. Any man with the if
teenth part Of grain of sense would prefer
to bury his money and run the risk of being
robbed, rather than take such chances as
this.
Looking at thes subject from another
standpoint we find from an investigation
of the national bank act and the decisions
in reference thereto that the only penalty
national bank is subject TO for usury is a
loss Of the usurious interest and same per
cent of the principal, and this only in case
it is sued TOR within a certain time; and no
state, whatever may be the form of its leg
islation, can enforce against national bank
or its officers greater penalty than this
because in contravention of the
laws Of the national government.
No Federal judge would hesitate
for moment to release under habeaS cor
pus for an offense under local laws were
the penalty sought TO be imposed more
onerous than the penalty under the ma
tional banking act. and right here is where
the hardship comes in on the citizens of our
own state. Suppose, for instance, a cashier
of q national bank and q cashier of a private
bank both doing business in the same
town. make loan of $1,000 each at 10 per
cent, and are indicted for usury.
The cashier of the national
court and is discharged. He also loses the
interest on his money and same per cent of
the principal if sued for within certain
period. but the poor sucker, under the oper-
alton of the state law, is cut down in the
house of his friends, nipped before his time
and fined $1,000 and mulcted in the costs of
the prosecution, and if unable TO pay the
bal ff,rfi hFr1r in, ioil Of he
rate of So per day.
The cashier of the nationahbank returns
to his business, charges his losses to profit
and loss account, and this comes out of the
bank stockholders, who reside in Boston,
in New York, in Philadelphia, in Chicago,
and laugh at our folly and the stupidity of
our laws and the dexterity with which we
slaughter our friends.
What / have said here applies to all
states where the penalty is more onerouS
than provided for by the national bank act
New York has attempted to somewhat
mitigate the harshness of her usury law
but only in favor of corporations by placing
her state banks on the same footing with
national banks, but this l submit is a glar-
ing injustice to her own citizens. The cor
poration is made 4 favorite and pet of the
law, while the private citizen is hunted
down like beast Of prey and subjected to
fine and Imprisonment for doing what
soulless thing may do every moment of its
existence.
Whenever the rights of the private citizen
become subordinate before the law to those
of corporations, then shall we look for the
glory of the American commonwealth to
depart. Nor is this all. Legislation may
as well attempt to control the price of a bale
of cotton, bushel of corn, pound of to-
bacco, horse or and acre of land as the
use of a hundred dollars. Each and all
must stand upon tho absolute law OF supply
and demand.
Capital is timid at all times, but when
hostile legislation is leveled at the subject
of her Investments, then does her tinidity
become fright, and disaster follows in the
wake of her fleeing train.
Our supreme court has recently decided
that as to the usurious interest, a prOmis-
sorry note cannot go into the hands of an
innocent holder; in other words, the
maker, should he choose, can defeat the
collection of usurious interest on note in
the hands of any person, it matters not how
many tunes it may have been transferred.
This it seems ought to satisfy any reason
able person, for should he be so disposed
he has the use of money loaned for nothing.
Another point of view. Does the law as
it now stands assist the borrower in pro-
curing loans at legal rates2 My observa-
ton would lead me to say most emphati-
cally, no! I have lived all my life in Texas,
and have frequently heard of money being
loaned at 3316 per cent, but never
until this present law took effect
mas it ever come under my obser-
walton that money brought from 3 to
per cent month, and this of frequent oc-
currence with the best security the coun-
try affords. What here say is not done in
a spirit of prejudice, but it is whole
some that we at times be confronted
with the truth
If Massachusetts, with many millions
more idle capital than we have, finds it a
wise and profitable thing to do away. with
usury laws. ours should at least be modi-
fed and fall back in line with the great
majority; for of one thing we may be sure:
We shall never be able to compel people to
come here and loan their money nor invest
their idle capital; the result is the shylocks
at home will be multiplied to the inevita-
Bile undoing of the needy borrower.
CLAY THOMPSON.