A practical exposition of the X. Commandments with a resolution of several momentous questions…A practical exposition of the X. Commandements with a resolution of several momentous questions…

It is not contrary to the rules of equity, that when one is so much benefited by the estate of another, that the person whose the estate is, should proportionably share of that benefit, which without him and his money, the other had not reaped: Nor is it contrary to the rules of charity, for although Charity command us to lend for our neighbours necessity, yet not for his gain and the enriching of him; and it would seem strange that a man, having nothing but money, ⟨p. 429⟩should be obliged to lend it freely to rich men, who making conqueish thereby, should reap the benefit, and yet he get nothing. The law of equity, That we should do to others, as we would have them do to us, will not infer, but that if a man, by possessing another mans money, did either make conqueish of so much rent by it, or did retain so much, which otherwise he could not do, he is obliged to make the lender proportionable sharer with him of the gain; for it is hard to say, that a man might buy such a piece of land with my money from another, and in buying of it gain so much, and yet by letting him keep both my money and the land, I be warranted to ask nothing at all. Sure, were I the borrower and buyer, I should think otherwise, and judge it equitable, that the lender should be a partaker of the profits arising, in some respect, from his own money.

It is not contrary to the rules of equity, that when one is so much benefited by the estate of another, that the person whose the estate is, should proportionably share of that benefit, which without him and his money, the other had not reaped: Nor is it contrary to the rules of charity, for although Charity command us to lend for our neighbours necessity, yet not for his gain and the inriching of him; and it would seem strange that a man, having nothing but money, ⟨p. 429⟩should be obliged to lend it freely to rich men, who making conqueish thereby, should reap the benefit, and yet he get nothing. The law of equity, That we should do to others, as we would have them do to us, will not infer, but that if a man, by possessing another mans money, did either make conqueish of so much rent by it, or did retain so much, which otherwayes he could not do, he is obliged to make the lender proportionable sharer with him of the gain; for it is hard to say, that a man might buy such a piece of land with my money from another, and in buying of it gain so much, and yet by letting him keep both my money and the land, I be warranted to ask nothing at all. Sure, were I the borrower and buyer, I should think otherwayes, and judge it equitable, that the lender should be a partaker of the profits arising, in some respect, from his own money.