Usury Stated Overthrown, Treatise · Part 2 · Section 21 – Section 23
NUM. XXI.
Queſt. But why may not I expect ſomewhat back for lending, ſaith the Champion? Becauſe, ſaith he, Loan ought to be gratuitous. Reply. Of a truth he is a free Borrower, or rather a bold Beggar (Lo, what he calls me, now a Beggar, then a Carrier.) in begging the Queſtion. How proves he this, that all lending to men of ability muſt be free? Or if lending muſt be free neceſſarily, then let him call the Contract by another name, and let it no longer go under the name of Lending, and then all is well, that fore is healed. Take learned Ames Judgment, &c.
Whereunto I anſwer,
1. That if I am a Beggar in this, other great Men are ſo too, and by name great (a)Bullinger Decad. 3. Serm. 1.Bullinger, who giveth the ſame Reaſon, ſaying, That Uſury (b)Lending ought to be free, becauſe it's one of the Contracts which Civilians call gratuitous, and are called mutuation, commodatum, depoſitum, ſtipulatio, mandatum, negotiorum geſtio.ought to be gratuitous (Mark, it ought to be ſo; that is his REASON, as it is mine) is committed in Lending ONLY, and not in other Contracts: Where let me add a ſufficient Reaſon, ſhewing that it ought to be ſo. (c)Tutelae adminiſtratio, pro mutuum & exhibitio, praeter quos caeteri ſunt Mercenarii. D. Vaſt. l. 1. c. 34.See the Margin.
2. But I ſtand upon Scriptures chiefly: And,
1. That in Exod. 22.25. If thou lend money; for ſo it is read in all old and new Tranſlations, and the Greek Interpreter hath it thus, foreign.
2. That in Luke 6.35. where Chriſt uſeth the ſame word, which all men tranſlate Mutuum date, Lend, looking for nothing again. And is not that gratuitous lending? Whether men be of ability or no, (to anſwer him) there is no Exception added.
3. I anſwer, It's not the calling of Lending by another name, that will heal the ſore; becauſe Lending is defined thus by the Learned.
Lending is ſuch a Contract (ſaith (d)Heming. Comm. in Jac. 3.Hemingius) as tranſferreth the Dominion or Property of a thing from one to another, for no conſideration of any Price or Recompence, but only with covenant that the ſame kind of thing he rendred and repayed again. Thus he of Lending. So that if you call the Contract by another name, and call it no longer Lending, the ſore is not therefore healed; as if you call Uſury by the name of Intereſt, as men uſually do, it is not therefore Intereſt, and muſt be no longer called Vſury, becauſe Vſury is one thing, and Intereſt another. Anſwerably whereunto, if you call Lending by the name of another Contract, yet is Lending one thing, and Lending ſtill; and another Contract another thing, and is defined after another manner. As for example; If you call ſuch a thing as Lending is, by the name of giving, as ſome do, it's not the ſame; becauſe Giving is defined after another manner, by a (a)Donariſ de Dona….Learned Author: Giving properly is, whereby a man giveth a thing, with a mind and purpoſe that he would have it preſently become his that doth receive it, and never in any wiſe to be returned again to himſelf. The like I could ſay of other things and Contracts. But note, That there is a two-fold Giving, 1. Of Loan. 2. A Free Gift, or Giving.
4. I anſwer, to the quoting of Ames, thus.
1. That Ames living in the Low-Countries, (b)That is, Three pounds ten ſhillings in the hundred; which ſhews that Ames will little advantage my Adverſary, and his Vſurers, becauſe they will not take ſo little, but muſt have at leaſt Six in the hundred.where ſome Vſury is defended, and not in England, where Vſury is ſo much cried down by moſt (as Learned B. Downam tells us), writeth as they uſe to write there; whereof more hereafter; becauſe there is no living there for a Diſſenter to have a Publick place of Profit.
2. That my Brethren and my ſelf in part ſay the ſame, That Vſury (ſo called) is not generally and abſolutely unlawful: For we hold Nautical Fenory (ſo called improperly) lawful, and Recompenſatory lawful, and liberal too; though we hold all Vſury, properly ſo called, and commonly practiſed, unlawful.
3. That if Ames held for that (which I hope he doth not), I do not ſee him by his few words prove what he ſaith. The Sayings and Negatives of men, though they may be good men, as he was, are no Proofs to me.
NVM. XXII.
Fourthly, As for his Clauſula, or Cloſe, which is, That Lending, if it be not free, paſſeth into another Contract, nominate or innominate, ſimple or mixt; I for my part cannot miſlike it: for it paſſes for Society, which we hold lawful, as I quoted for it learned Biſhop Downam; ſo that Ames is rather for me, ſaying, That Lending, if it be not free, mark, if it be not free, as we ſay it muſt be, nothing of that followeth, but that it paſſeth into another Contract; for then the Caſe is altered.
5. I anſwer, That Ames doth not well in it, when he ſaith, It cannot be proved, what we ſay, That all Lending, with what Circumſtances ſoever it be clothed, (Is his Addition not ours?) ought to be gratuitous: becauſe our Men do prove it. As for example; I can name as godly and well-read an Author as ever Ames was, who proveth this Point at full, That Lending muſt be gratuitous, and not for gain; and that if a Man lend for gain, his Lending is Uſury; ſpending ſix pages about it, for the proving of it: whereas Ames writeth but a line or two, thinking it enough to ſay, That it cannot be proved that all Lending muſt be gratuitous; when another (a)Dr. Sanders, fol. 21. Otherwiſe it is no Loan at all, but a ſelling, or ſetting to hire. Idem ibid.Doctor, as great as he, ſaith expreſly, That Loan ought always to be free: Mark, always, againſt Ames.
I, for my part, if I had no other Author at all on my ſide for it, yet ſhould make no queſtion of it, becauſe of theſe two ſufficient Scriptures which command it; Lend, looking for nothing again, Luke 6.35. and, From him that would borrow turn not away, Mat. 5.42. which muſt needs be underſtood of free Lending, becauſe Uſurers will not turn away from them that will borrow upon Uſury, giving good Security for the Loan, as Uſurers do expect it: For, have they not their Agents abroad to procure Borrowers? I add to theſe two Places, that one moſt excellent Scripture, Pſal. 112.5. which commends it, A good man is merciful, and lendeth, viz. freely: becauſe he that lendeth otherwiſe, as the Uſurer doth, cannot be either good or merciful, as it hath been formerly evidenced.
Before I go farther, I will mention one of the Uſurer's Tricks, which is, that he is for gratis too, as I and others; ſaying to him that cometh to borrow of him, I cannot forbear my Money ſo long; but to do you a Courteſie, I will lend you ſo much for half a year gratis, as if he would lend it gratis, that is freely, indeed: when in truth he means gratis the Noun, that is, ſuch as will be thankful, and pay him Uſe; and not gratis the Adverb, which ſignifies freely: whereupon ſome Uſurers call their Lending Giving, as I have formerly declared it.
NUM. XXIII.
But I count it high time to advance farther, and therefore I'll ſpend no more time about this.
My Adverſary, in the next place, goeth to anſwer my Citation for proof, out of Deut. 23.19. Thou ſhalt not lend upon Uſury; and ſaith, That it is elſewhere limited to thy poor brother.
Whereunto I anſwer, That not only to a poor Brother lending upon Uſury is forbidden, but, in this place by me cited, to any Brother; becauſe he ſaith, generally, Thy brother, (a)B. Jewel.whether he be rich or poor, there is no limitation. And by a Brother we may underſtand any man, ſaith (b)Tho. Aquinas 2.2. Q. 79. a 1.Aquinas alſo, (who is an abler man (I trow) to judge of the meaning of thy Brother than this Novice) becauſe every man we muſt hold to be our Brother. So that learned (c)Downam p. 202. and p. 202. he ſaith, And in this general ſenſe, including both Rich and Poor, the Learned among the Jews have underſtood this Law, and unto this day it's obſerved among them, ſaith Rabbi Abraham.Biſhop Downam makes an Anſwer to ſuch a Cavil, like mine, ſaying, This evaſion (of the poor Brother) is very frivolous; for in Deut. 23.19. there is no mention of the Poor, but all Uſury is forbidden towards a Brother, whether he be rich or poor. Thus he anſwers: With whom I joyn famous Dr. Sanders, who goeth farther, even to all men, ſaying, But now ſeeing every man is both our Neighbour and Brother, we may not take Ʋſury of any man at all; meaning doubtleſs Uſury properly ſo called.