h, yet desired to gain more
and was bidding urgently for the very loan the unfortunate brother
needed. Also even equity between the borrower and the lender would
work a hardness in the conditions of the poor man. Full protection
requires a law of general application.

7. Independence, self-reliance, self-support, was the condition aimed
at and encouraged in the Hebrew state. Borrowing was only in time of
sore need. The man who went a-borrowing was second only to the man who
went a-begging. The brother who, through misfortune became dependent,
was able the sooner to repay his loan and return to independence and
to self support.

8. In the repetition of the law in Deut. 23:19, 20, there is no
reference to the poverty of the borrower and it cannot by fair
interpretation be limited to the poor. "Thou shalt not lend upon usury
to thy brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of anything
that is lent upon usury. Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury;
but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury: that the Lord thy
God may bless thee in all that thou settest thine hand to do in the
land whither thou goest to possess it."

CHAPTER III.

USURY AND "THE STRANGER."

Deut. 23:19, 20: "Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother; usury
of money, usury of victuals, usury of anything that is lent upon
usury. Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy
brother thou shalt not lend upon usury: that the Lord thy God may
bless thee in all that thou settest thine hand to in the land whither
thou goest to possess it."

While there is no reference to poverty in this passage and the
prohibition cannot fairly be limited to loans to the poor, a shadow of
permission to exact usury is found in the clause: "unto a stranger
thou mayest lend upon usury."

Hebrews, who have been anxious to obey the letter of the Mosaic law,
while indifferent to its true spirit, have construed this into a
permission to exact usury of all Gentiles. Christian apologists for
usury, who have not utterly discarded all laws given by Moses as
effete and no longer binding, have tried hard to show that this clause
authorizes the general taking of interest. To do this it is wrested
from its natural connection, and the true historic reference is
ignored.

Three classes of persons, that were called strangers, may be noted for
the purpose of presenting the true import of this passage.

1. Those were called strangers who were