part of the State of Maryland the money
would be instantly withdrawn from the
market.
Mr. CLARKE. I think the gentleman mis-
understood me. I spoke of trade. That
oar merchants had not been subject to such
spasmodic changes of trade; and not of the
value of money.
Mr. CUSHING. If I recollect right the gen-
tleman said that the object of these restric-
tions was to control the spasmodic contrac-
tions of the money market to which fortun-
ately we had not been so much subject in the
State of Maryland as in the city of New
York. The money market of Maryland is
acted upon instantaneously by the money
market of New York.
It was said by the gentleman from Somer-
set (Mr. Dennis) that the banks take their
six per cent. in the beginning, which is true,
and that this makes it more than six per
cent. They do another thing. They very
often discount paper and give the man un-
current money. I have known cases in Bal-
timore city where money which was five per
cent. discount was taken for its face. That
made the interest nine or ten per cent. paid at
the banks, though nominally the law was
observed. The necessities of a man may be
such that he will be willing to take uncur-
rent money, and pay the bank in current
funds when the note is due.
The gentleman well said that the question
turns upon the point whether money ought
or ought not to he regulated by law. Be-
lieving as I do that money is a marketable
commodity in the whole present range of
commercial business in the civilized world—
believing as I do, and as the whole history of
the mercantile world teaches, that the use of
money fluctuates in value from day to day—
that the money itself changes, and that its
value to the people desiring its use varies
from day to day—that the opening of a new
market makes the value of the use of money
borrowed to-day totally different from what
it was yesterday—that the opening of a new
market to me for my produce, which I knew
not of yesterday, makes it worth while for
me to pay largely for money to invest in
sending that produce to the new market, be-
yond what I could have afforded to pay yes-
terday—all this coming from the fact that
money is unequally distributed—I believe
that it is against all sound political economy,
and against all sound political liberty, to
force a man to give to another that which he
himself owns, 'unless he pleases, except for
purposes required by the State or national
government, or unless at a rate which shall
represent its value to him.
When men desire to use money for pur-
poses of speculation, or business, or enter-
prise of necessity they must have regard to
what is paid for the use of money in the com-
munity, to the willingness of those who hold |
it to lend, and to the value at which they
hold it. If therefore, Maryland money can
be sent to New York and used more profit-
ably than it can be in Maryland, I am
under the disadvantage in Maryland when 1
apply to the people who own the money to
lend it to me, that I cannot bylaw pay an
equal rate, and if the man to whom I apply
is of such a character that he will not evade
the law, he can only say, "lam sorry; 1
had the money and would have preferred to
lend it to you at a given rate than to any
one else, but the law says that I shall not
lend it in Maryland above a given rate, and
I have therefore sent it to New York where
the law allows me one per cent. more," It is
a matter of regret to me, but the man looks
after his own interest. If I could have had
that money at seven per cent. it would have
been a benefit to me, and possibly to the com-
munity, and possibly a benefit to the State, as
all enterprise is a benefit. But my enterprise
must be given up because by law we have
prohibited the use of money from seeking its
level according to the law of supply and de-
mand. So the money has been transferred
from the place where it was needed and sent
to be used by a more liberal people.
I think with the gentleman from Somerset
that the whole question comes back to one
simple matter, whether money ought to be
regulated or not? I think it ought not. But
as it has been the custom of this State to reg-
ulate it, and as it seems to be the intention of
this convention to regulate it, I desire to have
it regulated in a manner which will give the
State of Maryland the use of money where
there is no contract upon a par with the
State of New York, and not so that New
York shall have power by paying one per
cent. more to draw the capital of Maryland
away from. the State. Then by allowing
private contract at a rate agreed upon by the
parties, you put the matter upon the fairest
possible basis.
If money is not worth the price which is
demanded, I will not contract to pay it. If
it is worth that price, what right has the
State by law, to prevent me from purchasing
it? It does not prevent me from purchasing
flour at sixteen dollars a barrel, which I could
have purchased at one time for eight dollars.
It does not interfere with my paying sixteen
dollars for coal to-day, which a year ago was
five dollars and fifty cents, because coal to-
day is worth sixteen dollars.
My colleague (Mr. Daniel) brought up
the instance of a man who may owe fifty
dollars for rent. His goods are distrained
and to be sold at auction; and he cannot
obtain the money at six per cent. But be
might have gone to a man at eight per cent.,
and obtained the money, and could afford to
pay eight per cent, for years, until he could
repay the principal, rather than to have his
goods sold. |
