The changed conditions of the race
in these last years are urged as a sufficient reason
for annulling this law. It is admitted that it
was righteous and beneficent in ages long past but
with the new light and new conditions of the present
it is effete, inapplicable and unjust. They call
attention to the vast extension of commerce, to the
marvelously increased facilities for travel, transportation
and intercommunication; to the innumerable and wonderful
inventions that in their application have brightened
our civilization. They exalt present conditions
and they belittle the long past conditions and thought.
The prohibition of usury belonged
to the past, the practice of usury is all but universal
in the present, therefore they argue that usury is
a part and a necessary part of our civilization and
to revive the old prohibition would turn the world’s
civilization backward and be as absurd as to now dispense
with steam or electricity.
In reply it may be said that the changes
are not universal, that there are some things that
abide, that the changes are trifling when compared
with those things that remain and are permanent.
1. Human nature remains the same.
Man, in body and mind, in physiology and psychology,
has not changed in these thousands of years.
That which in ages past promoted the health and vigor
of his body, will secure its best development now.
That discipline, culture and mental exercise that
secured the highest intellectual strength in ages
past will do the most for its best development now.
Many things that now give splendor to our civilization
do not promote either the best physical or mental
manhood.
2. Family ties remain. The
relation of husband and wife, of parents and children,
and the duties of their several positions in the home
have not changed. The family remains the social
unit as it has been in all ages. Sociology, the
science of social and political organization, is a
permanent science. It does not change with the
shifting temporal conditions of the people. Those
things which made for the general welfare of ages
ago are for the public weal now, and those things that
endangered the state then are to be avoided now.
3. The moral law remains unchanged
and unchangeable, with all the brilliant present there
is no amendment to the ten commandments. The
ethical nature remains and the voice of conscience,
approving the same right and condemning the same wrong,
is identical with the voice of conscience in the time
of Moses.
4. The laws of nature have not
changed. The relation between a cause and its
sequence remains. Like causes produce like effects.
No living thing has changed its nature.
A lion now is of the same nature that it was in the
time of Samson. So with every savage beast that
roams the jungle. Even the domesticated animals,
with all the effort and skill of intelligent man,
have only been smoothed or speeded a little.
The horse, cow, sheep, or dog have held their old
forms and dispositions.
Seed time and harvest come and go
and we are dependent for the same shower and sunshine
that gave Adam his first harvest.
We know some things they did not know
and we have bettered our tools, but the natural world
has shown no signs of change.
5. The relation of things to
each other have not changed. Plants must have
soil to grow in, animals must have vegetation to feed
upon. Fish must have water. And so with
the thousands of relations of climate, elements, soils,
plants, animals, fishes, birds and insects, they are
the identical relations sustained ages and ages ago.
6. The nature of money has not
changed. Its material and form and denominations
have been modified but the functions of money as a
storage of values and as a measure of values and as
a medium of exchange remain the same. Our gold
and silver and paper money may be more convenient
and more exact, but its functions are just the same
as the Indians’ wampum.
The law of supply and demand and the
equity in commercial transactions, great or small,
are unchanged. Money could always be used to
make or gather more money in business. It is no
more true now than in the times of David or Nehemiah.
If this had not then been possible; if there had not
been tempting opportunities, there would have been
no sin of usury for them to reprove.
Man’s changed conditions are
but trifling and incidental, relating to himself.
They do not affect a single natural or moral or economic
law.
The changed conditions, which are
urged as a reason that the prohibition of usury is
no longer binding, are only the conditions brought
about by the violation of that law.
The prohibition of usury is systematically
violated. The neighbor in the smallest transaction
with his neighbor exacts usury, though it be but a
few cents. The credit system has become universal.
It is the rare exception now to “own what you
have” and to “pay as you go.”
Interest bearing bonds are issued by the smallest manufacturing
plant, by the great corporation and by the empire.
These conditions do not prove usury right. They
only show how far true business, commercial, and political
principles have been perverted by this practice.
If violating a law annuls it, then
any law can be pushed aside. Let the claims of
the Sabbath day be ignored. Let the houses of
worship remain closed upon that day. Let work
be planned for seven days of the week. Let the
hum of the mills and the roar of commerce go on.
Take no note of the Sabbath day, either in business
or recreation or worship, and conditions will soon
be upon us, such that we may urge as plausibly, that
the Sabbath is effete, possible to our slow going
fathers but inconsistent with the necessary rush of
our day.
If the systematic violation of a law
annuls it then we can quiet the conscience and be
dishonest while dealing with a Turk in Constantinople
and we may lie while dickering with a Chinese merchant
in Canton.
If violating a law annuls it, even
the seventh commandment, the violation of which is
so offensive to decency and its observance so necessary
to the purity of the home, may in this way be ruled
out as a binding obligation. Let polygamy be
the order, supported by the example of Jacob and David
and Solomon, and the families be constituted along
that line, then enforced monogamy would seem to be
a sundering of tender ties and hardness toward the
cast off Hagars that is inconsistent with the Christian
spirit. An earnest, Godly man, a missionary friend
of the writer, under whose ministry a heathen chief
was converted, was misled by the plausibility.
The chief had a number of wives; he had children by
them; he was much attached to his wives and was fond
of his children, and they all seemed to love him and
clung to him. The missionary in the kindness of
his heart did not interfere with the family, permitting
the chief to keep his wives and placed his name on
the church roll of the Mission. For this act he
was reproved by the ecclesiastical authorities above
him. Let polygamy become as universal as usury
and even the seventh commandment in its strictness
will seem impracticable and unkind if not positively
cruel.
It will not do to claim freedom from
the prohibition of usury because we have organized
commerce and the state and all society in violation
of it.