Loan Capital. By the Rev. E. Latham. (W. J. Squires,
Woolwich, ca.)—Mr. Latham's only way of getting over Deut. xxiii, 20: "Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury" is to say that "the Jews were allowed to treat their Gentile neighbours unjustly.' This is amazing, especially when we remember the repeated in- junction "not to vex or oppress the stranger," because they them- selves "knew the heart of a stranger.'' The prohibition to lend to a countryman had a special reason ; we all know what a curse the moneylender is to an agricultural people. When we come to the New Testament, things are changed. The Jews are a mercantile people and our Lord recognises the situation. In the paraMe of the talents the successful traders are raised. The indolent servant, who felt or imagined himself unfit to trade, is blamed for having done what, on Mr. Latham's prineiples, he was bound to do, hidden his talent in the ground. He is told that he ought to have put it on deposit—to use a modern phrase—at the bankers. "And then," says the Lord, "I might have gone and received" (PALA, ?Ws bcosecrrianv lir) "mine own with interest." As for the theologians we concede them to Mr. Latham. They are on his side. But the necessities of modern life are against him. When he attempts, for instance, to distin- guish between preference stock and debentures, allowing the one and forbidding the other, be is vexing the consciences of Christian people with impossible refinements. All loans are for- bidden. "It is not my purpose here to discuss the question of national or municipal debt," says Mr. Latham. That is con- venient, —for him. But we should like to have his opinion, if he is to be our ductor dubitantium, for the matter presses. If the Government wants to borrow .t20,000,000 by issuing Consols, are we to lend it ? Mr. Latham is surely bound to say "No." He would forbid us to take debentures if the nation was building a railway; are we to take them when it is building a ship, making a battery of guns, or raising an army ?
Previous page
