NEW CHAPTERS IN THE WARFARE OF SCIENCE. 331 



ive, Wilson, a noted upholder of the strict theological view in 

 political economy, declared : " There is difference in deed between 

 the bite of a dogge and the bite of a flea, and yet, though the flea 

 doth lesse harm, yet the flea doth bite after hir kinde, yea, and 

 draweth blood, too. But what a world this is, that men will 

 make sin to be but a flea-bite, when they see God's word directly 

 against them/' 



The same view found strong upholders among contemporary 

 English Catholics. One of the most eminent of these, Nicholas 

 Sanders, revived very vigorously the use of an old scholastic 

 argument. He insisted that " man can not sell time," that time 

 is not a human possession, but something which is given by God 

 alone : he declared, " Time was not of your gift to your neighbor, 

 but of God's gift to you both." 



In the Parliament of the period, we find strong assertions of 

 the old idea, with constant reference to Scripture and the fathers. 

 In one debate, Wilson cited from Ezekiel and other prophets and 

 attributed to St Augustine the doctrine that " to take but a cup 

 of wine is usury and damnable." Fleetwood recalled the law 

 of King Edward the Confessor, which submitted usurers to the 

 ordeal. 



But arguments of this sort had little influence upon Elizabeth 

 and her statesmen. They re-established the practice of the taking 

 of interest under restrictions, and this, in various forms, has 

 remained in England ever since Most notable in this phase of 

 the evolution of scientific doctrine in political economy at that 

 period is the emergence from the political chaos of a recognized 

 difference between usury and interest. Between these two words, 

 which had so long been synonymous, a distinction now appears : 

 the former being construed to indicate oppressive interest, and 

 the latter just rates for the use of money. This idea gradually 

 sank into the popular mind of Protestant countries, and the 

 scriptural texts no longer presented any difiiculty to the people 

 at large, since there grew up a general belief that the word 

 " usury," as used in Scripture, had always meant exorbitant in- 

 terest. Still, that the old Aristotelian quibble had not been 

 entirely forgotten, is clearly seen by various passages in Shake- 

 speare's Merchant of Venice. But this line of reasoning seems to 

 have received its quietus from Lord Bacon. He did not indeed 

 develop a strong and connected argument on the subject, but he 

 burst the bonds of Aristotle, and based usance for money upon 

 natural laws. How powerful the new current of thought was, is 

 seen from the fact that James I, of all monarchs the most fettered 

 by scholasticism and theology, sanctioned a statute dealing with 

 interest for money as absolutely necessary. Yet, even after this, 

 the old idea asserted itself, for the bishops utterly refused to agree 



