of it which hee made therefore I justly challenge Rent for it The like case is for money the Borrower hath the use of it and though the money bee not the worse for using yet the Lender is the worse by missing the commodity which the other makes of it and the Borrower is bettered by the employment of it Also it is objected pag. 148. That money is voyd of all immediate use in it self to the possessor while hee doth enjoy it Ans. So it is with Land which immediately neither clothes nor feeds any man but by the mediation of tillage and pasturage both are effected and though no man immediately eats or wears money yet by the meanes of it food and raiment are procured Another objection is That money the more it doth increase the more it may which is unnaturall and contrary to other encrease Answ. It is so in other sorts of increase for one Sheep brings forth a Lamb and that Sheep and Lamb in time bring forth a double increase which multiplies to a third and so forward so one hundred pound brings forth ten pound and both together in time increase to produce eleven pound The only difference is that money is more durable than other fruitfull things which by course of Nature are more perishable Of the ungodliness of Vsury It is ungodly and impious against the first Table because it dependeth not upon Gods Providence but is assured by â—onds against the Act of God Ans. 1. Dr. Fenton forgets that he said Vsury belongs to the second Table Why is it here made a breach of the first Secondly the Vsurers security is to arm himself against the â—â—dinary fraudes negligencies or other follies of the borrower If by the hand of God an extraordinary loss do happen by the like means also an extraordinary gaine may be raised sometimes both which belong to the borrower except the mercy of the lender to whom he is to trust relieve him And surely the Vsurer hath greater cause and seems also to trust God more than any other man and is least armed against him He had need pray against foul-weather tempest wind and wrack for although hee be no Husbandman Merchant Tradesman nor Labourer yet by the thriving of all these he must live if all or any of these miscarry it is not his bonds many times which help him Neither against the hand of God onely is he unarmed but against the fraudes of men many times his security cannot defend him How many have been defrauded of their principall debts by fraudulent deeds of gift by concealing of goods and divers other waies It is true some few in a City may sometimes attain to a noted wealth by Usury but these are but as ciphers in comparison of hundreds who living by the like employment of money do scarce attain to a moderate gain whereby to maintain themselves in their first condition and many timâ—s as skilfull Usurers as the best what by the loss sometimes of interest sometimes of principal and other whiles of both and many times by the lying still of their mony for want of reasonable security have proved in the end perfect Beggers by this trade And what greater argument can there be of the hazard and danger of mony that is lent than the common opinion of the world which esteems a small revenew in land of Fee simple more safe and certain than almost a double encrease in mony with perpetual hazard and for this cause land is dearer than money As for taking of Bonds for payment it is no more injurious to the Providence of God than to have a bond or covenant of a Tenant for the payment of his rent for although some yeares by the unseasonablness of the year or by some other act of God the land yeelds not the rent contracted for yet the Tenant is absolutely bound to pay it without any condition of gaining so much by the land And the reason is grounded upon great equity and is all one both for contracts of land and money to be absâ—lute Neither GOD nâ—r Nature have proportioned the valuation of Lands Commodities or Moneys no Text can be brought to prove an Acre must be sold at such a price or a commodity at such a rate the worth of things in proportion one to another is a humane arbitrary custom grounded upon the several necessities or opinions of each particular Nation Thus the common estimation doth allow Lands Goods and Money taken with all casualties hazards and charges to be worth one year with another about a certain value and it is reasonable that such a certain value should be contracted for so that as the Seller or Letter is not to participate of the extraordinary gaines that may bee raised so hee is not to sustain the losses if any doe happen Of the Injustice of Vsury It is further urged pag. 98. that it is unjust because it takes hire for loan and sels Charity which should be free so that things are not lent but let if they goe for hire Ans. 1. Dr. Fenton can shew no reason why money may not be let as well as lenâ— as well as a house or a horse which may be both I ought in great necessity to lend freely to the poor yet this work of Charity doth not hinder me from letting the same thing where there is not the like necessity If the use of money for a time be worth mony in buying and selling as Dr. â— confesseth pag. 99. The rule may better hold in Letting which is no work of Charity though both in Letting and Selling Charity is to guide us It doth not follow that because I must lend a shilling for a day therfore I may not lend a pound for a year Besides even in letting for hire there is often both Charity and friendship shewed As if I let a thing for half the value the use of it is worth to one whom others dare not trust with their goods If some things which are spent in the first use may be sold for increase why may not other things that are used be let in the same sort since letting is but a temporary kind of selling and selling in effect a perpetuall kind of letting If such things as are bought this day for ten pound may be sold to morrow for eleven pound may not the same ten pound which by buying and selling may encrease in one day to thus eleven pound may it not by letting encrease in a whole year to as much Nor can there be any reason shewed since mony hath a gainfull use in it self and as Solomon saith answereth all things why I may not as well let a hundred pound in mony as a hundred-pounds worth of Cattell houses or lands which I buy with my mony And because they often tell us that he that beares the hazard must have the gain I must ask what they will say to a lease for life wherin both parties hazard yet but one gaines Dr. Andrews
but argue rashness peremptorily to determine there is no doubt of it thereby to ensnare the Consciences of the simple Besides the doubting spoken of by the Apostle though it were of things indifferent yet formerly before the comming of Christ they were things necessarily prescribed by the Law but after taken away by the Gospel so that to doubt of them was consequently to condemn the Gospell and deny the faith in Christ But the doubting of Usury is no establishng of the Ceremoniall Law or overthrowing of our belief and faith in the Gospell Neither is all doubtâ—ing meant but such onely as overcometh Faith for there is no faith but it is mingled with some doubting Lastly it is not necessary that faith should be alwaies grounded upon the Word of God for if a man be perswaded of any thing by the light of Reason or by Sense he is justly said to beleeve it To the confirmation of this doctrine I must produce some places of judicious Hooker The will of God saith he by which we are to judge our actions no sound divine in the world ever denied to be in Part made manifest even by the light of Nature and not by Scripture alone pag â—7 And he adds in another place that there may be a certain belief grounded upon other assurance than Scripture we are said to believe whatsoever we are certainly perswaded of whether it be by reason or sense pag 60. And in a third he gives this reason It â—s not required nor can be exacted at our hands that wee should yield unto any thing other assent than such as doth answer the evidence which is to be had of that we assent unto for which cause even in matters divine concerning some things we may lawfully doubt of some things we may very well retain aâ— opinion that they are probable and not unlikely to be true Then are our Consciences best resolved and in most agreable sort unto God and Nature setled when they are so far perswaded as those grounds of perswasion which are to be had will bear which thing I so much the rather set down for that I see how a number of Soules are for want of right information in this point oftentimes grievously vexed when bare and unbridlâ—d conclusions are put into their minds they finding not themselves to have thereof any great certainty Imagin this proceedeth only from lack of faith and that the Spirit of God doth not work in them as it doth in true beleevers by this meanes their hearts are much troubled they fall into anguish and perplexity whereas the truth is that how bold and confident soever we may bee in wordes when it commeth to the point of tryall such as the evidence is which the truth hath either in it self or through proof such is the hearts assent thereto neither can it bee stronger being grounded as it should bee pag. 73 74. Thus far Mr. Hooker Therefore it is no argument to conclude that because the Scripture doth not allow Vsury therefore it may not be used for if the Scripture do not absolutely condemne it it is sufficient if reason or Sense do guide our belief for the practice of it I leave those that doubt to consider what Dr. Fenton himself saith within a few lines in the same page pag 75. This Vsury which we have in hand is no principle of faith no mystery of Salvation to be apprehended in the simplicity of belief but a point of Morality belonging to the second table and so determinable by the rules of Equity and Charity It is objected pag. 77 that it is Scandalous and therefore unlawfull Aâ—s If scandall be taken and not given it is not in it self unlawfull Still he flies from the question Of the unnaturalness of Vsury A fourth Reason of Dr. Fenton is p. 91. that the encrease of mony is unnatural Therefore unlawfull Ans. This is no argument of Divinity from Scripture but of Philosophy from Aristotle Secondly if it were of force it serves onely against Vsury of money but not of all other things Thirdly it is confessed that money considered as it is a metal is not perhaps by nature apt to generation and increase and yet even that may bee doubted of But money considered as it is money which Art not Nature hath produced may be allowed an artificial increase or gain as well as houses ships and many other things not natural Policy hath ordained the value of Metals to bee the common rule and measure for the worth of all things vendible and by common estimation it is accompted in the place and stead of such things so that in opinion and use mony is both land house horse corn or any thing that is valued by it even man himself who in worth exceeds all other creatures is by Gods own valuation prized at a certain sum of money and fifty Shekels of Silver vvere accepted by God in the place and stead of a man who by vow belonged unto him Leviticus 27.3 It being then so apparent that Money is by Art taken and used for all things valuable both by man and God himself vvho had his peculiar Coin the Shekel of the Sanctuary for all sacred uses Exodus 30.13 It follows in all reason that since the nature of most things that are valued and sold is to bring forth an increase that money it self also which is esteemed for them should doe the like or else Art is frustrated of her intention who found out the use of money onely for the ease and benefit of Trade which proves to be a discommodity if the benefit of increase be lost by the conversion into money It is further objected by Dr. Fenton That money may not bee lâ—t for hire as a horse a hâ—use or 〈◊〉 because these things are the wâ—rse for letting â—nsw What thinks hâ— may aâ— man take hire for a house when he binds the Lessee to leave it in as good repair as hee found it Many times a horse by a moderate journey after long rest is the better whether may the Letter take money for his hire If this Argument were sound that no hire ought to be taken but where the things are the worse for using then I believe all the Rent that hath been paid for land since Nâ—â—hâ— Flood hath been unjustly taken For it will hardly appear that any Acre of land is worse now than in his dayes since many Acres are bettered by tillage and manuring which by lying waste are hurt and houses also decay most for want of inhabiting The true rule of Letting is not onely the Lenders loss in the impairing of the thing lent but the Borrowers gain by the use of it And we must consider as well what the owner is the worse by the want of that use as what the thing lent is impaired If another use my land though it be not the worse yet he is the better by having the crop of it and I am the worse by vvanting that benefit
by his bargain for example Admit land is bought and sold for sixteen yeares purchase and let the inheritance of the land bee made away for so little a summe as the land will bring home in sixteen yeares what Conscience is there to keep that for ever which in so short a time payeth the purchaser his principal There can be no other reason yielded for this great disproportion but this that both the Purchaser and Seller do equally value the use of the money and do make the bargain accordingly The purchase-mony considered with the Use of it would last about a thousand yeares in paying yearely so much as the Rent of the land is therefore the Purchaser expects to enjoy and the Seller intends to part with the land for ever because the inheritance of the land after a thousand yeares is not valuable for that ordinarily within four or five hundred yeares the possessions of the antientest families come to a period or decay In like manner an annuity for life is bought for nine yeares purchase not because a mans life is ordinarily taken to last but nine yeares but because the mony with the use will last almost twice nine yeares in paying the annuity so that if the Purchaser of the annuity dye within eighteen yeares the Grantor may be a gainer or at the least a saver by the bargain but if he live above eighteen yeares the Grantor must be at loss This Casuality of a lease for life wherein the Buyer hopes by his own life to be a gainer and the Seller hopes by the death of the Buyer to bee a gainer hath made some men if wee will believe Thomas Aquinas to think that a lease for life is the worst kind or double Vsury because there is an Vsurious intention on both sides as well in the Grantor as in the Grantee to gain If many men who are fit for Callings live idlely on Usury they sinne but no otherwise than those that let their lands they may and ought to serve God and their Country in some Calling if they do not it is no fault of Vsury but an abuse of it Neither let any man fear that Vsury will bring idleness in the world for if all men be idle there can be no Vsury It is the usury-imployment of men by their trading that makes the use of money to be at so high a value and many must bee idle if they borrow not a stock to set them on work Of the Vncharitableness of Vsury In the last Chapter of Dr. Fenton his second book I did expect some extraordinary argument against Vsury because it treats of the breach of Charity by Vsury and the opposition between them I did long to see it proved but now I am come to it I find it the shortest Chapter in his book both in quantity and proof the little that he saith is in effect that Vsurers are commonly uncharitable pag. 106. Answ. I did expect to have iâ— proved that all Vsury is in it selâ— uncharitable and he tells uâ— that all Vsurers are so It is the fault of the men and not of the thing Thrift which of it self is a vertue being abused is the hinderance of Charity and yet Thrift is no breach of Charity A thrifty man and an Vsurer may bee mercifull to the poor because they are many times better able than others If Vsury of it self were a breach of Charity then not to lend to Vsury were an act of Charity which is but a meer Privation and no Act at all The reason why Vsurers bee commonly found merciless is for that in many men Covetousness makes them Vsurers and not Vsury brings them to be Covetous Many Vsurers are found wel-disposed to Charity and give twice as much to Charitable uses as those that have twice their estate in Lands and are no Vsurers Since then all Vsurers are not uncharitable and those that be are found and not made such by Vsury it is but small Charity to say that Vsury of it self is the breach of Charity FINIS a Rom. 1.32 b Levit. 25. â— c Numb. 35.11 Deut. 19.3 d Deut. 15.1 2. e â—xâ—d 22.21.23.9 f De usuris leg. 1. Cod. Theod. l. 2. g 〈◊〉 ad Noâ—el 2. c. 4. â—d verbum Centesima h Gloss. in Cod. de usuris Leg. 26. ad verb tertiam pattem ad Leg. 28 in principio i Dist. 47. c. 2. verb Centesima k Epist. 2. in fine l Satyr 3. lib. 3. m Budaeus de asse l. 1. n De usuris Câ—d Theo. l. Leg. 2. o Cyprian de lapsis Annâ—tat Pamel 23. cap. 4. p Conc. general edit. Rome 1608. p. 23 q Neque in ulla Lege praeteritum tempus reprehenditur nisi ejus rei quae sua sponte scelerata ac neâ—aria est ut etiam si lex non esset magnopere vitanda foret Cicero lib. 3. in Verrem n. 76. p. 75. edit. Rob. Stephani 1339. r Conâ— Carthag 1. cap. 13. Arelaten 1 c. 12. Arel 11. c. 14. s De uâ—urâ—s Leg. 26. 〈◊〉 iust t Ibid. Leg. 28. u De vita Constantini l. 1. c. 26. x De exactionibus Leg. 3. lib. 11. Cod. Theod. y Concil. general p. 45. b. tom 3. edit. Rom. 1612 Act. 4. Sext. Synod z Ibid. p. 58. Eprope finem Actionis 4 a Magn. Ludâ—vic pij capit Lib. 5. cap. 36. lib. 1. c. 5.38.130 c. b Can. Apost. cap. 44. at post Gratian cap. 43. c Leo Epist. â— cap. 3. p. 5. d Hist. Bologn da Ghirardacci lib. 3. e Burch lib. 2. cap. 129. Ivo par 6. cap. 196. par 13. in principio Gratian Diâ—t 47. caus. 14. q. 2. f Decretal lib. 5. tit. 19. in sexto lib. 5. tit. 5. Clement lib. 5. tit. 5. c. g Hieron de Ceval de cognitione per viam violentiae par 2. q. 96. * A Mountain of Piety is a stock of Money raiâ—ed by the Charity of good people who observing the poor ruined by the Usury of Iewes did voluntarily contribute good store of treasure to be preserved and lent unto them whereby they upon security might have money at a low rate to relieve their wants which because the mass is great and the thing pious and charitable in it self is called a Mountain of Piety But in respect the Officers and other charges incident unto it cannot be had without some emolument therfore the borrower pays somewhat by the Moneth for the lone of that he receives Cajet. opusc. de monte pietat cap. 1. There is another sort which is when a Prince or State hath need of a good quantity of money and doth for his supply either impose a lone upon particular men or voluntarily receive a good summe from them and for their security assignes of his revenue 5.6.7 or 8. per cent This dissers from Use-money with us in that the lender cannot at his will call it in or make use of the money it self otherwise than by transferring his right in the Bank to another onely the Prince at his pleasure may by paying all in dissolve the Bank Antonin par 2. tit. 1. cap. 11. in principio And there wants not learned men which hold both these wayes of receving increase to bee Usurious and likewise that defend the contrary that neither of them is See Matheo Villani lib. 3. cap. 106. h In sexto de Vâ—uris c. 8. â— de quaestioniâ—us i In Clement de usuris cap. Vnico Giovan. Villani lib. 12. c. 57. k Giovan. Villani ib. l Ludovi a Paramo de Origine Inquisit lib. 2. c. n. 36. m Tattato dâ— Inquisitione c. 23.30 31. n Epist. Constant. apud Socr. lib. 1. c. 6 apud Theâ—d lib. 1. Hist. cap. 10. o Beda l. lib. 4. c. 17. p c. 17. p. 299. concil. Speâ—â—n q cap. 37. Leg. Ed. p. 151. r Cook Instit. 3. c. 74. p. 163. s Sim. Dunelm An. 1126. Col. 254 19. at Contuat Florent Wigorn Ano 1125. p. 501. t Apud Richard Hagulstad p. 327.66 u De pig noribus c. unico verbo Usuâ—a fol. 81. a. x 2 Tim. 2.4 y 1 Tim. 3.8 z Cas. Conscien c. 20. n. 29. p. 418. a Epist. 383. b Enchirid c. 69. to 3. c Cham. de caâ—â—ne to 1. lib. 12. c. 1. n. 3â— p. 424. d f 〈…〉 citatur aâ—ud Antâ—â—â—n par 2. 〈◊〉 Sect. 〈◊〉 g S. Aug. Retract 2 cap. 13.
and Contracts which are grounded only upon the laws of Nature and Nationâ— and many Cases there be which are confessed by all to be no apparent breaches of Charity nor any injustice found in them Insomuch that Dr. Downam is brought thereby to such a straight as he is forced to maintain that there be other respects which make usury unlawfull besides the hurt of our neighbour p. 44. 125. But if Charity be the fulfilling of the whole law I will give them leave to talke their fill yet I cannot beleeve how Vsury can be a sin if it hurt not my neighbour Their pretences of the oppression of the Common-wealth by taking Vsury of the Rich is but a meer Sanctuary of ignorance and a fiction which can never be proved since it is practised in the Richest Common-wealths Whether the law of Vsury be Iudiciall To prove the lawes against Vsury to be Morall and not Iudiciall Dr. Downam produceth a main argument which is not in Dr. F. his words are The law which Commandeth free lending is not Iudiciall but Morall for the same law which commandeth the affirmative forbiddeth the Negative Ans. 1. Dr. Downam mistakes in thinking free lending and lending for gain to be termes of affirmation and negation Lending and not lending which are Contradictorily opposed are only Affirmative Negative termes Lending freely or for gain are only severall sorts of lending and differing in qualities and though their qualities differ yet they are both positive and affirmative for it is an axiome Câ—ntrarioâ—um utrumque membrum 〈…〉 vuâ— In Contradictions and Privations one term is alwaies negative but it is not so in Contraries Secondly let me retort Dr. Dâ—wnams argument in a stronger Case The law which 〈◊〉 resting on the Sabbath is not Iudiciall but Morall therefore the law which forbiddeth Kindling a fire on the Sabbath day is Morall for the law which commandeth the affirmative forbiddeth the negative what will Dr. Dâ—w answer to this his own argument here is affirmation and negation Resting and not Resting in the kindling of a fire not Contraries onely but Contradictories yet I presume Dr. Downam will not conclude that kindling a fire on the Sabbath day is a breach of the Morall law Dr. Fenton is of opinion that if God doth forbid biting and opprâ—ssing Vsury onely by his law that thâ—n the law must needs be Morall and not Iudiciall except we will give liberty to Christians to oppress and bite their Brethren pag. 44. The answer is The Equity of the law is stil in force the Rigor of it is abrogated or thus the poor should not be oppressed is Morall that they should not be oppressed by Vsury is Iudicial To make the meaning of this distinction clear we must know that All Iudicial lawes were made for the hedging in or enclosing of the Morall law and whereas the Morall law was delivered either in Generall affirmative commandements or Negative prohibitions the Iudiciall comes after and gives some particular politique directions in the observation of them for example the Morall law saith in generall â—hou shalt Sanctifie the Sabbath then comes the Iudiciall and saith Ye shall kindle no fire throughâ—ut your habitations upon the Sabbath day Exod 35.3 so the Morall law tells us thou shalt not steal the Judiciall adds if a man Steal an oxe or a sheep he should pay five or four sold for it and in most cases but double Exod 22.1.4 So then there is a generall equity in all Judicialls which is Morall and eternall There is a law Levit. 25.23 the land shall not be sold for ever whereby selling of inheritance is forbidden and this law did bind 〈◊〉 1 Kings 21.3 that he would not â—ell his inheritance to king Ahab The equity of this law which binds all men even infidels to preserve or procure an inheritance or estate for their posterity remaines stil in force yet absolutely not to sell any land is esteemed no otherwise than a Judiciall law sitted for the Common-wealth of the Jews so the perpetuall equity of Sanctifying the Sabbath and of not Stealing abides although the kindling of a fire on that day is now arbitrary and the Compensation of stealing is left to the positive lawes of each nation The same law that forbids us to steal bids us to relieve the poor and so doth the equity of the law of Vsury It is sufficient that the generall equity of this law be observed and the poor relieved but that in particular they must be relieved by the not taking Vsury of them is not necessary It was a sin in any Jew to take Vsury of his poor although he did relieve him otherwayes because God did restrain him to that particular manner of relieving the poor But with us it is otherwise if by any other meanes we do sufficiently relieve the poor then even the taking of Vâ—ury of them is no sin nor oppression Concerning the Judicials of Moses we must also observe that they were not so particular but that many things were lest to the Ordinance of the Magistrate or high Priest and humane ordinances as Mr. Hooker doth observe are many times presuppâ—sed as grounds in the statutes of God Deut. 24.10 There is a Judiciall Law which ordereth onely the manner how a pledge must be taken this necessarily doth presuppose some former humane law that did order that pledges might be taken Even that ill law or Custome of divorce Deut. 24.1 is regulated by a Judiciall law that it might therby be made less hurtfull The reason why I note these things is because the law of God concerning Vsury did presuppose and was grounded on a former law or custome of the Jews which was then iâ—â—ase and practice And the specialâ— caution for the Poor might leave the Rich to the customes and lawes of the Magistrats wch did always regulate all sorts of contracts And wheras the law of Moses did allow Vsury only to Strangers It doth not follow but that others that were neither Poor nor Strangers were left to the ordinary laws of the Country No Magistrate could give a dispensation for Vsury towards the Poor nor a Prohibition for it towards Strangers so much as God ordered no human laws might alter as for other cases not specified they were left to the ordinary policy of the State For we must not think that God provided all the civill lawes of Israel His especiall care was to ordain lawes for the reformation of such sins as had been learnt by his people of the Egyptians or for the prevention of such as might be taught them by the Cananites I know that Dr. Fenton doth inferre that the law which prohibits Vsury is Moralâ— pag. 45. because the allowance of it to strangers is onely a Judiciall for unless it had been a sin what needs a toleration since lawfull things have no need of a permission Ans. 1. If the allowing of Vsury to strangers be no Law at all but onely an Exception or proviso