Question — Bontempi, Palladium Theologicum V · from Schola Thomistica
Question IV: Whether exchange is lawful when the banker's agent answers for the banker with the banker's own money
UNDERSTAND that in Exchange by letter, four parties intervene, that the Exchange may be perfect. The first is the Banker: the second the Banker's correspondent: the third the Banker's Respondent: the fourth the Respondent of the correspondent. The Banker therefore gives money to the correspondent, and from him in turn receives a promise that it be paid elsewhere. He assigns this obligation to his Respondent, so that he may receive the money there; and likewise the correspondent writes to his respondent, that he pay it; the payment having been made, the Exchange is perfect; and about this there is no controversy, whether it be licit; for there is a true permutation, transfer, and payment of money. But often the correspondent has no respondent in the place of payment, and so he has recourse to a merchant, who writes to his agent dwelling in that city, say Rome, that he pay such money to the agent, or respondent, of the Banker who has advanced it in this city, say Brescia. This too is licit, provided three other conditions intervene. The same must be said if the payment there is made through a servant out of the moneys of that same servant.
An CAMBIUM sit licitum, cum pro Campsario respondet Procurator Campsoris cum pecuniis ipsius Campsoris.
INTELLIGE in Cambio per litteras, quatuor personas intervenite, ut Cambium perfectum sit. Prima est Campsor: Secunda Campsarius: Tertia Respondens Campsoris: Quarta Respondens Campsarii. Campsor ergo dat pecuniam Campsario, et ab eo vicissim accipit promissum de ea alibi solvenda. Quam obligationem remittit ad suum Respondentem, ut ibi pecuniam recipiat, et similiter Campsarius scribit ad suum respondentem, ut eam solvat; facta vero solutione perfectum est Cambium; et de hoc non est controversia, licitum ne sit; ibi enim sit vera permutatio, translatio, et solutio pecuniae. Saepe vero Campsarius non habet in loco solutionis respondentem, ideo recurrit ad mercatorem, qui suo agenti in ea civitate, puta Romae degenti, scribat, ut pecuniam talem solvat agenti, vel respondenti Campsoris, qui in hac civitate, puta Brixiae, sibi erogaverit. Et hoc etiam licitum est, cum interveniant tres aliae conditiones. Idem dicendum, si per famulum fiat ibi solutio ex pecuniis eiusdem famuli.
THE CONTROVERSY is in the case in which the Banker has no respondent in that place, but a servant, and the Banker writes to him, that out of the Banker's own proper moneys he pay to himself on behalf of the correspondent that money which he received in another province.
CONTROVERSIA est in casu, quo Campsor non habet respondentem in loco illo, sed famulum, et Campsor scribit ad illum, ut de pecuniis ipsius Campsoris propriis solvat sibi ipsi pro Campsario pecuniam illam, quam in alia provincia recepit.
THIS Exchange they proclaim to be usurarious: Sotus de Iust. lib. 6. quaest. 10. art. 1. and quaest. 13. art. 1. Comitol. lib. 3. quaest. 15. and 16. Molina tract. 2. disp. 404. Mercatus de contract. lib. 4. cap. 7. Tanner. 2. 2. disp. 4. quaest. 7. dub. 5. num. 149. and 150. Roderic. lib. 3. de annuis redditibus, quaest. 5. num. 27. Romoaldus Coli Tract. de Cambiis, cap. 22. Palacius lib. 3. de contract. cap. 3. Rebell. 2. lib. 11. quaest. 6 concl. 3. Iustinianus in tract. de Cambiis, Lupus in cap. ult. Naviganti, §. 2. sub num. 29. Tom. 7. Cavata tract. de Cambiis, tit. de Usura, V. quaero Campsores. fol. 242. and very many others, among whom Faber de restit. in 4. disp. 47. cap. 9. num. 292.
HOC Cambium usurarium conclamant Sotus de Iust. lib. 6. quaest. 10. art. 1. et quaest. 13. art. 1. Comitol. lib. 3. quaest 15. et 16. Molina tract. 2. disp. 404. Mercatus de contract. lib. 4. cap. 7. Tanner. 2. 2. disp. 4. quaest. 7. dub. 5. num. 149. et 150. Roderic. lib. 3. de annuis redditibus, quaest. 5. num. 27. Romoaldus Coli Tract. de Cambiis, cap. 22. Palacius lib. 3. de contract. cap. 3. Rebell. 2. lib. 11. quaest. 6 concl. 3. Iustinianus in tract. de Cambiis, Lupus in cap. ult. Naviganti, §. 2. sub num. 29. Tom. 7. Cavata tract. de Cambiis, tit. de Usura, V. quaero Campsores. fol. 242. et alii permulti, inter quos Faber de restit. in 4. disp. 47. cap. 9. num. 292.
YET the opposite opinion he judges probable: Azor part. 3. lib. 10. cap. 9. quaestio 2. Megala 1. 2. lib. 2. cap. 16. quaest. 3. Naldus verb. Cambium, Author consil. 31. among the consilia, Navar. tract. 2. lib. 5. tit. de usuris, Salas Tract. de Cambiis, disp. 17. Lessius de iustitia, lib. 2. cap. 23. dub. 7. num. 71. Sà verb. Cambium, Homobonus de exam. part. 2. Tract. 9. cap. 17. quaest. 56. Salvatorius de Cambiis, part. 3. num. 5. Filliucius Tom. 2. tract. 35. part. 2. cap. 8. num. 436. Batthol. a S. Fausto in speculo, disp. 16. quaest. 22. num. 2. Tanner. disp. 4. quaest. 8. dub. 5. Salon de iustitia, Tom. 2. quaest. 4. de Cambiis, art. 2. controv. 12. Thomas Boninsignus cap. 7. de Cambiis, num. 7. and 9. Scortia in constit. Pontif. epitome 107. Theorem. 291. and an anonymous Theologian in a tract de Cambiis, published at Milan, apud Bidellum in the year 1623. where he cites Marinus Fornarius, and Cosmas Stella of the Society of Jesus. Diana p. p. Tract. 8. resol. 2. who asserts that very many of his own Religion, and of the Society of Jesus, hold this; Caspensis tract. 19. sect. 5. who says it does not seem damnable, since it is practiced by all the Merchants in Spain, France, Italy, and the Low Countries, with the supreme Pontiffs knowing, or at least the Ordinaries of the places, who would not permit it if the contract were usurarious.
OPPOSITAM tamen sententiam probabilem censet Azor part. 3. lib. 10. cap. 9. quaestio 2. Megala 1. 2. lib. 2. cap. 16. quaest. 3. Naldus verb. Cambium, Author consil. 31. inter consilia, Navar. tract. 2. lib. 5. tit. de usuris, Salas Tract. de Cambiis, disp. 17. Lessius de iustitia, lib. 2. cap. 23. dub. 7. num. 71. Sà verb. Cambium, Homobonus de exam. part. 2. Tract. 9. cap. 17. quaest. 56. Salvatorius de Cambiis, part. 3. num. 5. Filliucius Tom. 2. tract. 35. part. 2. cap. 8. num. 436. Batthol. a S. Fausto in speculo, disp. 16. quaest. 22. num. 2. Tanner. disp. 4. quaest. 8. dub. 5. Salon de iustitia, Tom. 2. quaest. 4. de Cambiis, art. 2. controv. 12. Thomas Boninsignus cap. 7. de Cambiis, num. 7. et 9. Scortia in constit. Pontif. epitome 107. Theorem. 291. et Theologus innominatus tract. de Cambiis, edito Mediolani, apud Bidellum anno 1623. ubi citat Marinum Fornarium, et Cosmam Stellam Societatis Iesu. Diana p. p. Tract. 8. resol. 2. qui asserit hoc sentire plurimos suae Religionis, et Societatis Iesu, Caspensis tract. 19. sect. 5. qui ait, non videri damnandum, cum ab omnibus Mercatoribus in Hispania, Gallia, Italia, et Belgio exerceatur, scientibus summis Pontificibus, vel saltem locorum Ordinariis, quod non permitterent, si contractus esset usurarii.
IN St. Bonaventure I find nothing, except sermon 4. on several holy martyrs; where he says the office of money-changers is to test gold, or silver, or whatever metal struck into denarii.
IN D. Bonavent. nihil invenio, nisi sermone 4. de pluribus sanctis martyribus; ubi dicit Campsorum officium esse probare aurum, aut argentum, aut quodcumque metallum in denarios excusum.
THEREFORE this Exchange is proved licit by them first from the letter of Pius V. to the Bolognese, where he speaks thus: Che ogni persona possa dar danari a Cambio, e che le lettere syno recapitate sopra essi datari, e cosi tener li suoi Cambii sino che saranno imborsati da chi havera preso i danari. There the Pontiff speaks absolutely, without distinction of a proper or another correspondent; of one's own, or another's money.
PROBATUR ergo ab illis hoc Cambium licitum esse primo ex epistola Pii V. ad Bononienses, ubi sic loquitur: Che ogni persona possa dar danari a Cambio, e che le lettere syno recapitate sopra essi datari, e cosi tener li suoi Cambii sino che saranno imborsati da chi havera preso i danari. Ibi Pontifex loquitur absolute absque distinctione proprii, vel alterius correspondentis; propriae, vel alterius pecuniae.
THIS same was thus declared by the Sacred Congregation of the Most Eminent Cardinals to the Archbishop of Palermo, in the year 1574. the matter having been referred to the Most Holy Gregory XIII.
HOC idem ita declaratum est a S. Congregatione Eminentissimorum Cardinalium, Archiepiscopo Panormitano, anno 1574. re cum sanctissimo Gregorio XIII. collata.
THEY also strive to prove this Exchange by reasons, because it suffices for a real Exchange that in the place where the exchange is made the correspondent have money in very truth, actually or in credit: but the correspondent, in this second manner, there has money, because there the Banker lends it: Therefore. It is confirmed, for if the servant were to lend his credit, which he has with the Banker, he could pay him, and so forth.
PROBARE, etiam rationibus nituntur hoc Cambium, quia ad Cambium reale sufficit, ut in loco, ubi Cambitur, habeat Campsarius pecuniam veram re ipsa, vel in credito: sed Campsarius, hoc secundo modo, ibi habet pecuniam, quia ibi Campsarius eam commodat: Ergo. Confirmatur, nam si famulus commodaret suum creditum, quod habet cum Campsore, posset ei solvere, ita, etc.
I CONFESS that these, or other reasons, do not move me; for in that place the correspondent has not real money, but fictitious money from the Banker. For what credit does he have with the Banker? Nay rather it seems express simulation; for an Exchange requires a diversity of moneys, a diversity of persons; but here there is one true person, that is, the Banker, who feigns that he is also the correspondent, and pays to himself. It is also one money, the Banker's. It is confirmed: Contracts of permutation require real permutations; but permutation is of several, and of one with another, that it may be proved whether commutative equality be present; and therefore the holy Doctor says that the money-changer, by his office, if he be a true money-changer, is to test the variety, and diversity of money, and to examine whether a true permutation intervene in the price, etc.; otherwise what comparison of the same with itself?
FATEOR has, vel alias rationes me non movere; nam Campsarius in loco illo non habet pecuniam veram, sed fictam a Campsore. Quod enim creditum habet apud Campsorem? Imo potius videtur expressa simulatio; nam ad Cambium requiritur diversitas pecuniae, diversitas personarum; at vero hic una est persona vera, idest Campsor, qui fingit se etiam Campsarium, et sibi ipsi solvit. Est etiam una pecunia Campsoris. Confirmatur: Contractus commutationum requirit reales commutationes; commutatio autem est plurium, et unius cum alio, ut probetur, an aequalitas commutativa adsit, et ideo ait S. Doctor, Campsorem ex officio suo, si sit verus Campsor, probare varietatem, et diversitatem pecuniae, et experiri, an vera commutatio interveniat in pretio, etc. alioqui quae comparatio eiusdem ad se?
NOR let them say, with Diana loco cit. Caspensis num. 28. Lessius num. 63. Scauia de commerciis, et Cambio, §. 6. that the Banker's servant represents two persons, namely the Banker's and the correspondent's; such Metaphysical subtleties often vanish in moral matters; for Persons are multiplied insofar as they contract, and are dealers in moneys; not, however, as they run about, as they are men; for in this they are too much materially constituted. Thus formally they are several, inasmuch as they are contracting; but there is no commutative contract, unless there is a real permutation. Let them tell me, where indeed is the permutation of the Banker's money with the Banker's money? Granted that it were carried even by many beasts of burden, promised by a herd of menservants and maidservants, etc.
NEQUE dicant Diana loco cit. Caspensis num. 28. Lessius num. 63. Scauia de commerciis, et Cambio, §. 6. famulum Campsoris duas personas repraesentare, Campsoris scilicet, et Campsarii, haec Metaphysicalia in moralibus saepenumero evanescunt; nam Personae in tantum multiplicantur, in quantum contrahunt, et pecuniae sunt tractatores; non autem, ut discurrunt, ut homines sunt; nimis enim in hoc materialiter se habent. Itaque formaliter sunt plures, quatenus sunt contrahentes; at non est contractus commutativus, nisi ubi est realis commutatio. Dicant mihi, ubinam est commutatio pecuniae Campsoris cum pecunia Campsoris? Esto ferretur etiam a multis iumentis, promitteretur a grege famulorum, famularumque, etc.
I REVERE the decree of the supreme Pontiff, if it existed; but this which they adduce does not concede this manner of Exchange, but only a real Exchange, che possano dar danari a Cambio, but where indeed is the exchange of denarii in this case? See Iustinianus.
REVEREOR decretum summi Pontificis, si extaret; sed hoc, quod afferunt non concedit hunc modum Cambii, sed solum Cambium reale, che possano dar danari a Cambio, sed ubinam est Cambium denariorum in hoc casu? Vide Iustinianum.
AS TO the Sacred Congregation, I say that it declared only that this Exchange is not contained in the things forbidden by Pius V. in the Extravagant, in which three kinds of Exchange are condemned. The first, in which the letters are not sent. The second, in which they are sent, but return empty. The third, when payments are made in the same place: whether it be licit is not declared by the Sacred Congregation.
QUOAD S. Congregationem dico, eam solum declarasse, non contineri hoc Cambium in vetitis a Pio V. in Extravaganti, in qua tria Cambia damnantur. Primum, in quo litterae non mittuntur. Secundum, in quo mittuntur, sed redeunt inanes. Tertium, quando in eodem loco fiunt solutiones: An vero sit licitum, non declaratur a S. Congregatione.
THIS opinion therefore I judge dangerous, as even Diana confesses, and therefore this Exchange is not to be praised, or recommended, whether by counsel, or by persuasion. The same confess Filliucius num. 438. Caspensis num. 29. and others with Tanner num. 147.
HANC sententiam igitur periculosam arbitror, ut fatetur etiam Diana, et ideo non esse hoc Cambium laudandum, vel consilio, vel suasione. Idem fatentur Filliucius num. 438. Caspensis num. 29. et alii cum Tannero num. 147.
I urge this, however, by the argument of St. Bonaventure in the speculum animae, cap. 2. §. tertius principalis fructus iniustitiae.
Hoc autem urgeo argumento D. Bonavent. in speculo animae, cap. 2. §. tertius principalis fructus iniustitiae.
LET US DEAL, my money-changers, sincerely, and in friendship, and let us doff the cloak, and search the naked exchange down to the Anatomy. You surely do not pursue this most frequent contract out of CHARITY, but for gain: Therefore you give most frequently, and of set purpose, for gain, so that it be restored in the same place, and thus you intend to take gain from the delayed payment. This you seriously intend; the rest are childish rattles, and comic, as when a servant plays the parts of the correspondent and the Banker too, distinct by merely Scotist formalities. I exhort you therefore earnestly that you come to your senses, and seriously weigh the salvation of your souls; for God cannot be deceived.
AGAMUS, Campsores mei, sincere, et amice, et pallium exuamus, nudumque cambium usque ad Anatomen perlustremus. Vos sane hunc contractum frequentissimum non agitis ex Charitate, sed ob lucrum: Datis igitur ad lucrum frequentissime, et ex proposito, ut in eodem loco restituatur, et sic accipere intenditis lucrum ex dilata solutione. Ita hoc serio intenditis; caetera vero puerilia crepundia sunt, et comica, ut famulus personas induat Campsarii, simul et Campsoris, solis Scoticis formalitatibus diversas. Hortor igitur serius ut resipiscatis, et serio animae salutem pertractetis; non enim Deus decipi potest.
This then is that Exchange called cum La Ricorsa, which almost coincides with the Exchange of continuation, in which the re-exchange is multiplied; it smells ill.
Hoc igitur Cambium dictum, cum La Ricorsa, quod fere convenit cum Cambio continuationis, in quo recambium multiplicatur, male olet.