Battle Against Usury

8/6/2019 Battle Against Usury

1/22

The Battle against Usury

John Barth

Hist 3390

May 5, 2010

Dr. Kelly-Sheer


2/22

2

Battle against Usury

What is usury? This is a common question that people ask when discussing the subject.

There are a growing number of Americans that do not know what the term usury means. The

term is not common in the lexicon today. The term usury is in short, derived from the Latin

usus, to use and aera, a mark upon money to show its value. Usury is charging excessive

interest on a loan. 1

Modern free-market economics assumes as one of its axioms that society cannot exist and

prosper without charging interest on loans. There are fundamentally two questions at the center

of the question of interest. The first question is how much interest is fair and how much isusurious? The second is what entity determines what is fair? Is it the free-market where

individuals engage in transactions without government interference or does the government have

a role in setting a limit on how much interest may be charged in its role as the protector of the

commonweal?

The above mentioned questions are debated today as they were back in the nineteenth

century. It was the nineteenth century that the question of usury needs to be looked at because

the nineteenth century was the century that was transformative for the United States and western

civilization in general. New theories of economics emerged that are still relevant today. New

ideas concerning natural law theory were developed out of the rational ideals of the

enlightenment. There are those in the nineteenth century that want to see a repeal of the usury

laws. Even though there has been a corruption of natural law theory, it still provided a strong

defense against usury by laissez faire economics.

There are some economists that believe that usury does not need to involve interest or a

loan. Usury can come from a business transaction. The Catholic economist Fr. Heinrich Pesch


3/22

3

S.J. wrote that Usury in a business transaction is the contractual appropriation of obvious

surplus value in the process of buying and selling. The selling price of a chair that would be too

high or too low the market price could constitute surplus value and therefore be usurious. 2

There are several areas to explore to understand the usury debate of the nineteenth

century. These areas are: the evolution of usury, natural law theory, and corruption of natural

law theory, Christian ethics, and nineteenth century economic theory concerning credit, and

United States monetary policy during the nineteenth century. These areas are vital in order to

understand the usury debate because all of these play a crucial role during the nineteenth century.

The evolution of usury has for most of recorded history been fairly consistent. Theclassical philosopher Aristotle had a very harsh and critical view towards usury. He thought that

usury was the most hated sort of economic exchange. He explained his reasons by stating that

usury makes a gain out of money itself, and not from the natural object of it. For money was

intended to be used in exchange, but not to increase at interest. And this term interest, which

means the birth of money from money, is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring

resembles the parent. He thought this was wrong and unnatural because money was the

medium of exchange; that cannot produce anything from itself. 3

An example of Aristotles theory of money would be a carpenter who makes a chair and

sold it to a customer for ten dollars. The money is the medium of exchange and it required the

work of the carpenter to produce the chair. The object for the money was the chair. The

unnatural part, if instead of producing the chair through the work of ones own labor and then

selling it for money, was to take the money that the carpenter had for materials to make the chair

and then loaning that money out at interest to make the ten dollar profit. There was no labor

involved in producing that profit just money reproducing itself. That was unnatural for Aristotle.


4/22

4

The idea of any form of interest as being usurious was firmly entrenched in the middle

ages due to Christian ethics. The medieval theologian Peter Lombard used the sixth

commandment as his exegesis for the prohibition of usury. He felt that usury was an illicit

usurpation of anothers things. The teacher of Thomas Aquinas, Albert Magnus stated that

usury was secundum se; a sin by its own nature. Thomas Aquinass exegesis of Deuteronomy

concerning the prohibition of Jews taking usury from other Jews he linked with the Gospel. He

wrote that to take usury from any man is simply evil, because we ought to treat every man as

our neighbor and brother, especially in the state of the Gospel. 4

The idea of all interest being usurious started changing by the time of the Reformation.The thought during that time was that a small amount of interest would not be considered sinful.

The Protestant Reformer John Calvin, who was a lawyer by training, took a legal nuanced view

towards usury. Calvin studied Deuteronomy, Ezekiel and Psalm XV and concluded that not all

usury was bad and that receiving interest for a business venture does not make one a usurer.

This is important because John Calvin was the head of a committee that decided that an interest

rate set at five percent was fair. 5

The impact that Calvin had on the theory of interest and usury cannot be underestimated.

The author Benjamin Nelson wrote that everyone from the sixteenth century to the nineteenth

century anyone who advocated for more liberal usury laws turned to Calvin for support. This

was where the divorce occurs between economic issues and Christian ethics. This later has

implications in Natural Law theory. 6

Natural law theory was important to the understanding of the usury debate during the

nineteenth century because the Founding Fathers of the United States made Natural Law the

cornerstone of constitutional government. Natural Law should have at least three axioms. The


5/22

5

axioms were rational, universal, and eternal. Natural Law was founded in both Greek and

Roman jurisprudence, however only the Scholastic view and Lockes views on Natural Law will

be discussed. 7

The Scholastic view of Natural Law was exemplified by the writings of Thomas Aquinas,

a theologian. Aquinass treatise on Natural Law made reference to the common good that all law

needed to promote the common good. Aquinas stated that any precept concerning a particular

deed has the character of law only insofar as it is ordered to the common good. Aquinas also

links the Natural Law with the Eternal Law which is God, the Divine Law which is scripture, and

human law. This is important because it provides for the betterment of the common good andthe individual himself. This linking of human law to the natural law with the divine and eternal

law provided the bulwark against usury. It does this because allowing usury to take hold within a

community does not advance the common good. Some groups within the community will be

taken advantage of and hurt financially and this is how it injures the common good. 8

The nature of Natural Law changed overtime. This change became a corruption of

Natural Law. The English philosopher John Locke broke with traditional natural law theory on

the idea of a social contract between individuals who consented to be governed. Locke also

emphasized the individuals right to property. Locke believed that people have an exclusive

right to property. Locke however did not believe that property rights were absolute. Even

though Locke believed in the common good and the consent of the governed, he believed that

usury was acceptable. 9

One of the reasons that usury would be acceptable under Lockes theory was because of

the contract. The contract was both the foundation of the market economy and Lockes political


6/22


7/22

7

employments, to create the conditions for a need for the use of money. The money would be

used to purchase goods; this would cause the money to circulate. 13

Money was circulating through the nineteenth century economy but because of

specialization of employments this creates the conditions for usury. What might have been

produced by an individual has to be purchased due to specialization. This created the need to

purchase goods and services on credit with interest.

What credit did was it helped the individual obtain money in an emergency in the form

of a loan to be repaid in interest. Credit was also used for industry for large purchases. The

nineteenth century economist George Tucker stated that credit enters so largely into thedealings and concerns of every civilized community, that if any large part of its operations were

suddenly suspended, the whole machinery of society would be a stand. 14

What Tucker meant in the above paragraph was that most imported goods were paid for

by credit during the nineteenth century. Then the importers advanced credit to the wholesalers in

order to buy the imported goods; that in turn extended credit to the merchants, to buy the goods

for sale to their customers. The merchants issued credit to their customers, the customers then

purchased those imported goods. During the nineteenth century if credit was suspended

altogether, it might put a stop to more than half the commercial dealings of the community. 15

During the nineteenth century there were five different types of credit. The first type was

the simplest where credit was given by a merchant to a customer to purchase goods. The

trustworthiness of the customer to pay back the debt was the determination of issuing credit.

What was also usually required was a cash payment in addition to the price of a product. This

was done to protect the seller from loss and to make a profit. The nineteenth century economist


8/22

8

George Tucker believed that this type of credit exceeded the amount of circulating currency in

excess of several hundred million dollars. 16

The second type of credit was the promissory note and bond where the borrower gave his

promise to pay back the credit or loan. The bond was higher in dignity and is distinguished

differently under English common law and all states where that system prevails. The

promissory note and the bond could allow the lender to collect the principal of the loan and any

interest due if the loan is not paid back on time. The written agreement also gives the lender

greater leverage in a court of law if it ever becomes necessary to force the borrower to repay

back the loan.17

The third class of credit was bills of exchange, which were similar to the modern concept

of foreign currency exchange. A bill of exchange was an agreement between two contracting

parties agreed to exchange the money of one country for money in another. During the

nineteenth century bills of exchange were used most often by merchants engaged in foreign

commerce who did not want to run the risk of transporting gold or silver. 18

Public debt is the fourth type of credit and according to the economist George Tucker

Governmentssometimes find it expedient to anticipate their revenues by means of their

credit. The government issues a stock certificate to the lender which bears an annual interest;

they were able to do this because they are raising money on the credit of future taxes. Public

works projects that benefit the common good were financed using public debt. Some examples

that Tucker used to describe the uses of public debt were defense of the state, the construction of

the Erie Canal in New York and the Louisiana purchase. 19

The fifth and final type of credit was bank bills. They were promissory notes issued by

the bank, in exchange for promissory notes of individuals, bills of exchange, or specie. What


9/22

9

makes bank bills different from the promissory note is that the bank bill is payable to the holder

of the bank bill and not to a particular person as in the case of a promissory note. This is paper

money issued by a bank and the advantage is that it is easier to carry than precious metals like

silver and gold. Tucker has called bank bills one the most important inventions of

commerce. 20

With money, credit and paper currency, society was going to need a place where people

could go to obtain credit and money. An institution where specie could be exchanged for paper

money or paper money for specie was a bank. Banks in the United States were plentiful. There

was almost a sense of banking fever sweeping the United States. Thomas Jefferson wrote thatour deluded citizens are clamoring for banks, more banks. The American mind is now in that

state of fever. 21

Thomas Jefferson was also against usury and interest of any kind. He had an Aristotelian

view of money. His letter to Charles Yancey in 1816 gives an insight into his view on interest

It is vain for common sense to urge that nothing can produce nothing. He is commenting on

the fact that bankers were using trickery to obtain wealth without any effort or work. His letter

also stated that We are now taught to believe that legerdemain tricks upon paper can produce as

solid wealth as hard labor in the earth. 22

One of the issues that affected usury was one of banking regulation and this was

illustrated with the bank war during the Jackson administration. There was an issue with the

charter of the second Bank of the United States and banking in general. The issue with the Bank

of the United States was it had too much power over monetary policy. The bank had a virtual

monopoly of the currency and practically complete control over credit and the price level.


10/22

10

President Andrew Jackson believed in hard currency which actual gold or silver money

instead of paper money issued by banks. Jackson became a proponent of hard money after the

panic of 1819. He also wanted to replace fractional reserve banking with one hundred percent

reserve banking. Jackson and his followers called Jacksonians adopted or in some cases

pioneered in the Currency School of analysis, which pinned the blame for boom-bust cycles on

inflationary expansions followed by contractions of bank credit. 23

The boom-bust cycle of the hard money proponents believed that banks caused

depressions based on over issuing their notes. This would cause a rise in prices and speculation

would develop. The hard money theorists believed that an appearance of prosperity thataccompanies a boom, people spend freely. This then will lead to an expansion of credit

leading to overtrading and inflation. Eventually this will cause a contraction in the economy

because of too many new business operations depending on credit creates new promissory

notes. The contraction comes from too many promissory notes which increases the demand

for discounts, till finally the currency depreciates so greatly that specie is required for export.

This causes the banks to call in their loans, timid people start runs on banks, contraction turns to

panic, and panic to collapse. 24

Other issues about paper money are that the working classes did not like being paid with

paper money. They believed they were being cheated and in many cases they were being

cheated. There were some unscrupulous employers that bought up depreciated notes and

palmed them off on their workingman at face value. With hard currency it would end

employees being cheated out of their money. Jackson is quoted as saying that it is the duty of

every government, so to regulate its currency as to protect this numerous class as far as

practicable, from the impositions of avarice and fraud. 25


11/22

11

What Jackson was advocating was using the law for the promotion of the common good.

Jackson believed that paper money with banks issuing notes and the monopoly power of the

Bank of the United States was not as beneficial to the commonweal as hard currency which

would be specie. The question in the usury debate was not whether paper money or hard

currency was used, but does the state have a right to regulate the amount of interest that can be

charged on a loan? The answer was yes because Jackson recognized a duty that government has

a right to protect the majority of citizens from the greed of others.

The basis for government action comes from the two parts in the Constitution of the

United States. The first part can be found in the Preamble of the Constitution which to promotethe general welfare is a reference to the common good. The second part is in article one,

section eight of the Constitution which gives the Congress the power to tax and make laws for

the general welfare make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into

Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the

Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof. It was implied in the

necessary and proper clause of the Constitution that the government in addition to the power to

tax, can regulate banks and the interest rate as long as it providing for the general welfare. 26

The right of the government to pass and enforce usury laws was based on the Natural

Law tradition of the law protecting the common good. This was challenged in the nineteenth

century with the rise of modern economics, and liberty of contract. Adam Smith who is

considered to be the father of modern economics wrote Wealth of Nations in 1776 which helped

usher in a new age of economic thought. Smith believed that the best economic policy for the

public good was free from government intervention with individuals pursuing their own self

interest. However there was one area in the economy that he supported government


12/22

12

intervention and that was on regulating the loan market. He was one of the only great classical

economists that supported usury laws. 27

There were two reasons according to economist Joseph Jadlow that Adam Smith

supported usury laws. One was for the elimination of high risk loans. The other was an end to

consumption loans. Smiths theory to eliminate high-risk loans was to set the legal rate for

usury just above the market rate for the safest loans. This would prevent lenders from making

high-risk loans because they would not be able to legally receive the full risk premium. Smith

was also hoping to end consumption loans because he believed that consumption loans were bad

for the economy. People who used loans for consumption acts as part of a prodigal anddissipates in the maintenance of the idle, what was destined for the support of the industrious.

Adam Smith believed that loans should be used for capital in the maintenance of productive

labourers, who reproduce the value [of the loan] with a profit. 28

Jeremy Bentham the founder of Utilitarianism was a contemporary of Adam Smith and

disagreed with Adam Smith over usury and usury laws. Bentham attacked usury laws as a

restraint to liberty of contract. He wrote that you, who fetter contracts; you who lay restraints

on the liberty of man. Bentham argued that there was no such thing as usury: for what rate

of interest is there that can naturally be more proper than another? His argument was similar to

Lockes in allowing the market to determine the natural interest rate. Bentham also believed that

usury laws were not effective based on people devising ways of evading them. He gave an

example of an edict by the King of France in 1766 by which the French King attempted to

reduce the rate of interest from five to four percent. Money continued to be lent in France at five

percent. 29


13/22

13

The leading nineteenth century economists disagreed with Adam Smith concerning

usury. Many advocated the repeal of usury laws. The famous British economist David Ricardo

who was also a member of the British Parliament supported the repeal of usury laws in England

in 1821. He argued that the rate of interest would not rise because of market competition

between lender and borrower. Ricardo is quoted concerning this market competition that the

lenders of money would not have more power to raise the rate of interest than the borrowers

would have to keep it down; and the competition between both would serve to bring it to a

reasonable standard. He also made references that the usury laws were ineffective and that

people found ways around the laws to charge higher than the legal rate of interest.30

Jean Baptiste Say believed that usury would increase because of usury laws. Say wrote

in his Treatise on Political Economy that the practice of usury has been uniformly revived,

whenever it has been attempted to limit the rate of interest. John Stuart Mill also agreed with

Say and Ricardo on usury laws. Mill wrote that it is a misapprehension of the causes which

influence commercial transactions, to suppose that the rate of interest is made lower by law, than

it would be made by the spontaneous play of supply and demand. 31

Lawmakers in the nineteenth century were not as eager to abandon the usury laws in the

United States based on arguments from economists. There was still a conviction in several states

anchored to the Natural law concept that usury was not good for the general welfare. There was

a case in Indiana during the 1830s where they repealed the usury laws for a period of about four

years and the results were devastating. Many people retired to die in secret, too proud to make

known his ruin induced by his own imprudence and the absence of legal protection. 32

There were many people in Indiana that were sold out of house and home. Many times

the creditors waited until the interest accrued in value that the debt closely equaled in value to


14/22

14

the debtors estate before seeking legal action. This resulted in judgments of payments of fifty

or twenty cents per day, or per week, for a loan of fifty or a hundred dollarssome instances

interest had become more than ten times the amount of the principal. A loan that was judged at

twenty cents a day on a fifty dollar principal at one-hundred eighty days is eighty-six dollars.

The average wages for a farm laborer in 1850 was $22.60 a month in Maryland. This can begin

to be usury. Once the people of Indiana realized what was happening there became irresistible

public opinionfor usury laws. 33

Wisconsin experimented with a repeal of its usury laws with the hopes of producing

capital and letting the market set the rate of interest between lenders and borrowers like DavidRicardo advocated. Wisconsin had the same fate as Indiana with regards to excessive interest.

The supporters of the repeal were hoping that interest would decrease with the repeal of the

usury laws, instead the opposite happened and there was a sharp increase in interest rates. This

required the state to reenact their usury laws. One of the results of the repeal was that nearly

one third of the entire improved real estate in Wisconsin is under mortgage; a greater part will

have to be sold. 34

The State of New York repealed its usury laws in 1837. Usury was so egregious that the

state enacted the strictest usury law in the country. The law in New York stated that usurer will

lose his whole debt, to be fined a thousand dollars, and to be imprisoned six months. 35

The nineteenth century jurist and legislator John Whipple believed along with Aristotle

that money was not a commodity. He believed that money existed by legislation. Money was

the standard by which value is measured. His thesis was that since the government regulates it

value it can also regulate its use. He stated that money is authorized by law convenience, and

not profit. 36


15/22

15

The Catholic historian Hilaire Belloc held similar beliefs with that of John Whipple on

the definition of money and usury. His belief was that the purpose of currency is the facilitation

of the multiple exchange of goods. Bellocs facilitation of exchange is Whipples standard by

which value is measured. Belloc as well as Whipple was a critic of usury 37

Belloc wrote that usury was based on two simple premises. His first premise was that

usury was a tribute from Society as the price of releasing currency from hitherto withheld from

its proper function acting as the circulating medium of exchange. The second premise was that

usury was a claim for payment which may, but also may not exist. 38

Belloc provided an example for both premises. He used a bank in a small town as anillustration for his first premise. The bank had a monopoly on the lending of money. This bank

had the power to dictate terms such as interest to the community in order to release the currency.

The second illustration was a prospector who wants to borrow money to mine ore. If the lender

agreed to a portion of the profit then that would not be usury. If however the lender demands

interest payments on the principal amount even if the mine was not profitable, then that would be

usurious. 39

The economists and those that argue for liberty of contract were operating on theory. The

theory that let the market set the interest rate and that usury is acceptable in society; do not take

into account those that cannot pay their debts. When the creditor comes to collect the debt and

the debtor cannot pay for the debt; the debtor in the nineteenth century went to jail. An example

of this was described by the historian John B. McMaster following the War of 1812 For the

smallest debt possible to contractthe body of a debtor, whether man or woman would be seized

by the creditor and cast into jail. 40


16/22

16

The battle over ideas that was what the debate on usury was about. Once charging a

small amount of interest on a loan became acceptable; then the idea of removing the usury laws

as a restraint to economic growth began to develop. This idea became divorced from the old

Natural Law based on Christian ethics to a corrupted version of Natural Law based on contract.

The economists of the nineteenth century made three arguments. The first was the idea of

liberty of contract as an economic and personal freedom was one of the main arguments of

Locke as well as the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century economists. Another argument

was the self regulating market. The third argument is that people engaged in the lending and

borrowing will find a way around the law. These were basic theories and philosophical axiomsat the time.

The liberty of contract and personal freedom arguments was a corruption of Natural Law

theory as well as ethics. Individuals are free to contract as long as it does not injure the common

good. When a speculator charges high interest rates it does not help the common good it injures

the commonweal. The situation that happened when the usury laws were repealed in Indiana did

not help the community, the unregulated interest caused individuals to lose their homes. Usury

was out of control that the Indiana legislature had to reenact the usury laws.

The argument by David Ricardo of the self regulating market that would set the market

rate for interest was disproven in Wisconsin. Ricardo argued that the borrowers would keep the

lenders from charging usurious interests rates, so there would be no need for usury laws.

Wisconsin repealed the usury laws and interest instead of decreasing, increased. The interest rate

increased, the borrowers were not able to hold in check the lenders. Wisconsin was forced to

reenact the usury laws. Ricardos theory was disproven.


17/22

17

The third argument dealing with lenders and debtors finding a way around the law or

ignoring it completely was one of the least reasoned arguments. What Locke and the other

economists were advocating was a form of black market lending. In essence they are advocating

abolishing laws that they do not agree with for economic reasons. Would they approve of

abolishing laws against burglary? Not all burglars are caught. Would they advocate eliminating

customs and excise laws? Smuggling was illegal; the state was entitled to collect taxes on

customs. Not all smugglers get caught; people find a way around custom duties. This is where

their logic was headed. Because there are individuals that will find a way around the law, the

law should be abolished.The state of New York repealed there usury laws but had to reenact their laws because

usury was so egregious. Instead of abolishing their laws they made the usury laws stricter. The

law in New York was one thousand dollar fine and up to six months imprisonment.

Usury has been with humanity from before Aristotle to Adam Smith and John Whipple.

Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas were against usury; both thought the concept was an evil in the

community. Thomas Aquinas combining the reason of Aristotle with the Christian faith grafted

the Natural Law to the Eternal Law of God; providing a moral foundation against usury as vital

to the common good.

Adam Smith was the only economist that was advocating for the strengthening of usury

laws and regulating interest. He and John Whipple both provide sound arguments for usury

laws. Smith using a sound reasoned argument why high risks loans need to eliminated. Whipple

using the empirical evidences from the court rooms and legislatures how unregulated interest

was not good for the community. Despite the onslaught of laissez faire economics, Natural Law

theory still provided a good defense against usury.


18/22

18

.

Notes

1. J.B.C. Murray, The History of Usury , (1866; repr., Whitefish, MT:Kessinger Publishing, 2010), 13.

2. Heinrich Pesch, Ethics and the National Economy , (1918; repr., trans. RupertEderer (Norfolk: IHS , 2004), 85-86.

3. Aristotle Politics 1.10, http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/politics.1.one.html (accessed April 9 th 2010).

4. He [Peter Lombard] lumps usury together with fraud, rapine and theftplainly prohibited by the Mosaic commandment against theft. Benjamin Nelson, The Idea of Usury: From Tribal Brotherhood to Universal Otherhood , 2nd ed. (Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press, 1969), 9, 13-14.

5. Nelson, The Idea of Usury, 77; Michael Wykes, Devaluing the Scholastics:Calvins Ethics on Usury, Calvin Theological Journal 38 (2003): 41http://www.calvin.edu/library/database/crcpi/fulltext/ctj/88050.pdf . (accessed February23, 2010).

6. Nelson, 74.

7. Arthur Harding, ed., Origins of Natural Law Tradition , (Dallas: SouthernMethodist University Press, 1954), 1.

8. Aquinas, Thomas, Selected writings , ed. and trans. Ralph McInerny(London: Penguin Books, 1998), 611-623. Aquinas believed that a part of natural lawwas the ability to know what is good and what is evil. Usury was evil because it wasagainst the natural law because people recognized what usury was. They were able to dothis in part by natural law.

9. Paul Sigmund, Natural Law in Political Thought , (Cambridge: Winthrop, 1971),

86-87.

10. Edward Harpham, John Lockes Two Treatises of Government New Interpretations , (Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1992), 127.

11. Harpham, 137.


19/22

19

12. John Locke, Several Papers Relating to Money, Interest and Trade, (1696;repr., New York: Augustus Kelley, 1968), 2-3.

13. George Tucker, The Theory of Money and Banks , 1839 Reprint

(New York: Kelly, 1964), 24-25.14. Tucker, 121, 125.

15. Tucker, 127.

16. Tucker, 130-131.

17. Tucker, 131.

18. Tucker, 132-133.

19. Tucker, 140-141.

20. Tucker, 142-143.

21. Thomas Jefferson to Charles Yancy, January 6, 1816, in The Works of Thomas Jefferson in Twelve Volumes Federal Edition , ed. Paul Leicester Fordhttp://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mtj:@field(DOCID+@lit(tj110163)) (accessed February 23, 2010).

22. Ibid.

23.

Arthur Schlesinger, The Age of Jackson , (Boston: Little Brown, 1950), 74-75;Murray Rothbard, A History of Money and Banking in the United States : From Colonial Era to World War II , (Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute, 2005), 90-91.

24. Schlesinger, 121.

25. Schlesinger, 120-121

26. U.S. Constitution, preamble, art. 1, sec. 8.

27. Joseph, Jadlow, Adam Smith on Usury Laws, The Journal of Finance XXXII,no 4 (September 1977): 1195, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2326522 (accessed January 21,2010).

28. Jadlow, 1196.

29. Jeremy Bentham, D efence of Usury , (1818; repr., Gloucester: DodoPress, 2008), 1,4,24.


20/22


21/22

21

Bibliography

I. Primary Sources

Aquinas, Thomas. Selected Writings. Edited and Translated by Ralph McInerny. London:

Penguin Books, 1998.

Aristotle. Politics. Translated by Benjamin Jowett. http://classics.mit.edu

/Aristotle/politics.1.one.html (accessed April 9, 2010).

Bentham, Jeremy. D efence of Usury. 1818. Reprint. Gloucester: Dodo Press, 2008.

Jefferson, Thomas. Thomas Jefferson to Charles Yancy, January 6, 1816. The Works of Thomas

Jefferson in Twelve Volumes Federal Edition. Edited by Paul Leicester Ford.

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mtj:@field(DOCID+@lit(tj110163))

(accessed February 23, 2010).

Locke, John. Several Papers Relating to Money, Interest and Trade, Etc . 1696. Reprint.

New York: Kelly, 1968.

Mill, John. Principles of Political Economy . Vol. 3 of The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill .

Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1965.

Murray, J.B.C. The History of Usury from the Earliest Period to the Present Time.

1866. Reprint. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, 2010.

Ricardo, David. The Works and Correspondence of D avid Ricardo. Vol 5. Edited by PieroSraffa and M.H. D obb . Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2005.http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile

=show.php%3Ftitle=206&chapter=38788&layout=html&Itemid=27 (accessed April 20,2010).

Say, Jean. A Treatise on Political Economy . 1821. Reprint. New York: Augustus Kelly, 1964.

Tucker, George. The Theory of Money and Banks. 1839. Reprint. New York: Kelly, 1964.U.S. Constitution . http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

(accessed April 3, 2010).

Whipple, John. Free Trade in Money, or Note-shaving, the Great Cause of Fraud, Poverty and

Ruin: Stringent Usury Laws, the Best D efence of the People Against Hard Times. An


22/22

Battle Against Usury

Documents

Transcript of Battle Against Usury