The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1894-07-25


powerfully against any interest at all.
Mi!man, in his notes TO Gibbon says: THE
fathers are unanimous. and host of coun-
ellis" Luther was extremely severe, say
ing: The heather was able, by the light
Of reason, to conclude that Insurer is
double-dyed thief and murderer.
Whoever eats up. robS and steals tn,
nourishment of another. commits as great
a murder so far as in him lies, he who
starVes a man or utterly undOes him.
such does Insurer, and sits the while
safe on his stool when he ought rather
to be hanging from the gallows Little
thieves are put in the stocks. great thieves
go haunting in gold and silk. Therefore
is there on earth no greater enemy of man
after the devil, than a grippe money and
uSurer."
The same view was held by the clergy OF
England, as may be seen by a discourse on
usury by DR.. Wilson about $50 The voices
81 Grecian and Roman sages and statesmen
were in accord with Jewish and Christian
authority Prof. Ely says: "Aristotle, like
the ancientS generally, taught the sinful
ness of interest. The greatest
philosophers and statesmen of classical
antiquity, and of the Christian era until
modern times, have been opposed to the
taking of interest. Cicero, Seneca and
Plutarch were very pronounced. Cicero
tells us that Cato. being asked what he
thought of usury, answered by asking the
person who put the question. what he
thought about murder. This branch may
be closed by a quotation from Francis
Walkers political Economy" p. $50, where
re says: For many centuries, and even
within comparatively recent period, the
Christian church prescribed the taking Of
interest as a moral offense, and the laws of
near al civilized countries made it q
crime, while the voice of publicists and
ethical writers alike was raised against it
as wicked and pernicious practice.
70 no,
heretofore used refers to any interest at
all. Such was the meaning of the ancients
ana writers referred to. Cruden in his
Bible Concordance" says: by usury is
generally understood the gain of anything
above the principal or that which was
lent eXacted only in consideration of the
loan And Prof. Ely says: The Mosaic
legislation prohibited all interest, for usury
IN Older literature means not merely
cessive interest but any interest at all
Under such views of the divinity and
moral necessity to national welfare of the
decree against interest on money it was
not until the year 1916. by the 9th of S7th
Henry Will, that any interest was toler-
ated in England. That act allowed 10 per
cent. In 1924 it was reduced to per cent
in 1872 to c. and in 17l3 to per cent, at
which it remained until the present reign
of Victoria. when all restrictions on loans
were abrogated. The parliament in pass
ing the act of Henry VIII, thought interest
immoral, but tolerated it to what was
termed divers greedy, uncharitable and
covetous persons" adding, But this was
not meant as if to allow usury, which was
a thing unlawful, a vice most odious and
detestable.' 0Froude's Hist. Eng, Vol V.
p 800 Lord Bacon. whose essay on usurv
was written in 1923, although he thinks
usury must exist, admits that it has
against it the argument that a usurer VIC
lates the first law that was made for man
a IN
the sweat of his own face. and not by the
labor of another. That he considered it
immoral is evident from his words Il say
this only that usury is concession by
reason Of hardness of heart" But the
liberation of interest by parliament did not
meet public favor. Mr.. Walker says:
Though legalized, public sentiment and
particularly the clergy, remained in high
degree hostile to usury.'
We come now to crticise the arguments
of those who in more modern times have
upheld usury. The general tone of politca
tempted to reason in favor of interest on
money. Mr.. Walker says "McCuloch at
tributes to John Calvin the high honor of
having first detected the fallacy of this
(Aristotles) argument against usury.''
But we may question if the acumen of
the mind which ordered the burning of
Servetus, and insisted that Deity had fore
ordained portion of the race to eternal
torment was superior to that possessed by
Aristotle and Moses. It were better to
class this discovery by Calvin that usury
was lawful with the now exploded theory
of Nautilus (also much advanced by Nam
mon) that war, famine and pestience are
dlVlne agencies Tor discriminating the be-
ingS He has created whom the earth could
not nourish.
The reasoning in general for usury is
limited to specific cases and is not from
national social results. 1t is pointed out
that in case cases, \ borrowed 81, 900
from Il at 10 per cent, and engaged in
some speculation or enterprise which prov
ed SO profitable that A made $4,000 a year,
or $1,000 as the may be, and therefore
the usury is beneficial to A, or that money
buys property which yields an increase
above interest. But this in no wise over
comes the objection that far more men
fail than succeed in enterprises upon Dor
rowed capital. BY special cases, or classes
OF instances which do not view the ma
tional or social result, many conceded evils
in general lottery appears good, and is
a fortune to A, but detracts not from the
moral fact that lotteries in general are
injurious to the people, and will not by any
honest sovereignty be permitted. Even in
cest might not in some cases show evil
results, but the general result of such a
policy, as shown by statistics, would prove
most disastrous morally and physically to
the human race. This species of reasoning
which points out the advantages to certain
individuals of having paid usury has no
place in sound political economy, which
deals with universal SOCIAL results, consid-
erlng society as a brotherhood, made as
Josephus says, for fellowship, where the
common good is to be ever preferred. To
pay interest on loans successfully presumes
all enterprises are successful. all seasons
fruitful. Nature has no plane upon which
such scheme may operate. The best laid
plans of enterprise disappoint; crops
fail elements destroy. and sick
ness palsies much of human effort
Csury reckons with none of these
incidents-takes no account of times, sea-
sons or conditions. but without ceasing
biteth and gnaweth. by night and in ad-
verslty, without mercy, consuming the la
Dor and products of men and nations.
bringing all wealth into the hands of a
few, and the masses to poverty, ignorance
and crime.
RESULTS OF USURY IN ALL NATIONS.
To this all nations testify. 1t beggared
India and Egypt. The Hebrews were
brought to starvation and slavery bv in
terest in the time of Nehemiah, where If
is Written: There was a great cry of
the people and of their wives against their
brethren the Jews. 8 We have mort
gagged our lands. vineyards and houses.
and 10, we bring into bondage our
sons and our daughters to be servants;
neither is it III our power to re-
deem them; for other men have our lands
and Vineyards Nehemiah the great re-
storer of Israel. says: II was angry when
l heard their cry and these words
and said unto them. We exact usury every