Answ. Lending is a duty, when we have it, and our brother's necessity requireth it, and true prudence telleth us, that we have no better way to lay it out, which is inconsistent with that. And therefore rich men ordinarily should both lend and give as prudence shall direct. But there is an imprudent and so a sinful lending; as 1. When you will lend that which is another's, and you have no power to lend. 2. When you lend that which you must needs require again, while you might easily foresee that the borrower is not like to pay. Lend nothing but what you have either great probability will be repaid, or else which you are willing to give in case the debtor cannot or will not pay; or at least when suing for it, will not have scandalous and worse effects than not lending. For it is very ordinary when you come to demand it and sue for it, to stir up the hatred of the debtor against you, and to make him your enemy, and to break his charity by your imprudent charity; in such a case, if you are obliged to relieve him, give him so much as you can spare, rather than lend him that which you cannot spare, but must sue for. In such cases, if charity go not without prudence, nor prudence without charity, you may well enough see when to lend, and how much.

Quest. XIV. 'Is it lawful to take upon usury in necessity, when the creditor doth unjustly or unmercifully require it?'

Answ. Not in case that the consequents (by encouraging sin or otherwise) be like to do more hurt, than the money will do you good. Else, it is lawful when it is for your benefit; as it is lawful to take part of your wages for your work, or part of the worth of your commodity, when you cannot have the whole; and as it is lawful to purchase your rights of an enemy, or your life of a thief as is aforesaid. A man may buy his own benefit of an unrighteous

man.

Quest. xv. Doth not contracting for a certain sum of gain, make usury in that case unlawful, which might lawfully be taken of one that is free?'

Answ. Yes, in case that contracting determine an uncertain case without sufficient cause: as if you agree, that whether the borrower gain or lose, and be poor or rich, I will have so much gain; that is, whether it prove merci

ful or unmerciful, I will have it. But then in that case, if it so prove unmerciful, it may not be taken without contracting, if freely offered. No contract may tie the debtor to that which is against justice or charity; and no contract may absolutely require that which may prove uncharitable; unless there be a tacit condition, or exception of such a case implied. Otherwise I see no Scripture or reason, why a contract altereth the case, and may not be used to secure that increase which is neither unrighteous or unmerciful; it may be the bond of equity, but not of iniquity. As in case of a certain gain by the borrower, a certain use may be contracted for; and in case of uncertain gain to the borrower, a conditional contract may be made. Yea, in case of merchandize, where men's poverty forbiddeth not such bargains, I see not but it is lawful to sell a greater uncertain gain, for a smaller certain gain; and so to make the contracts absolute (as Amesius Cas. Consc. on this question sheweth). As all oppression and unmercifulness must be avoided, and all men must do as they would (judiciously) be done by; so it is a bad thing to corrupt religion, and fill the world with causeless scruples, by making that a sin which is no sin. Divines that live in great cities and among merchandize, are usually fitter judges in this case, than those that live more obscurely (without experience) in the country.

Tit. 5. Cases of Conscience about Lusory Contracts.

Quest. 1. Is it lawful to lay wagers upon the credit or confidence of one another's opinions or assertions in discourse? As e. g. I will lay you so much that I am in the right?'

Answ. Yes, if these three things concur: 1. That the true end of the wager is, to be a penalty to him that shall be guilty of a rash and false assertion, and not to gratify the covetousness of the other. 2. That it be no greater a sum than can be demanded and paid, without breach of charity, or too much hurt to the loser (as above the proportion of his error). 3. That it be no other but what both parties are truly willing to stand to the loss of, if either of them lose,

and that beforehand they truly seem so willing to each other.

Quest. 11. Is it lawful to lay wagers upon horse-races, dogs, hawks, bear-baitings or such games as depend upon the activity of beast or man?'

Answ. Yes, upon the two last expressed conditions; and 3. That it be not an exercise which is itself unlawful, by cruelty to beasts, or hazard to the lives of men (as in fencing, running, wrestling, &c. it may fall out if it be not cautiously done), or by the expence of an undue proportion of time in them, which is the common malignity of such recreations.

Quest. 111. May I lawfully give money to see such sports, as bear-baitings, stage-plays, masks, shows, puppetplays, activities of man or beast? &c.'

Answ. There are many shows that are desirable and laudable, (as of strange creatures, monsters, rare engines, activities, &c.) the sight of which it is lawful to purchase, at a proportionable price; as a prospect through one of Galileo's tubes or such another, is worth much money to a studious person. But when the exercise is unlawful (as all stage-plays are that ever I saw, or had just information of; yea, odiously evil; however it is very possible that a comedy or tragedy might with abundance of cautions be lawfully acted), it is then (usually) unlawful to be a spectator either for money or on free cost. I say, (usually) because it is possible that some one that is necessitated to be there, or that goeth to find out their evil to suppress them, or that is once only induced to know the truth of them, may do it innocently; but so do not they, who are present voluntarily and approvingly. 3. And if the recreation be lawful in itself, yet when vain persons go thither to feed a carnal fancy and vicious humour, which delighteth more in vanity, than they delight in piety, and when it wasteth their time and corrupteth their minds, and alienateth them from good, or hindereth duty, it is to them unlawful.

Quest. IV. Is it lawful to play at cards or dice for money, or at any lotteryd?'

Answ. The greatest doubt is, whether the games be lawful, many learned divines being for the negative, and many

d Of Recreations, see before.

for the affirmative; and those that are for the affirmative lay down so many necessaries or conditions to prove them lawful, as I scarce ever yet saw meet together; but if they be proved at all lawful, the case of wagers is resolved as the

next.

Quest. v. May I play at bowls, run, shoot, &c., or use such personal activities for money?'

Answ. Yes, 1. If you make not the game itself bad, by any accident. 2. If your wager be laid for sport, and not for covetousness (striving who shall get another's money, and give them nothing for it). 3. And if no more be laid than is suitable to the sport, and the loser doth well and willingly pay.

Quest. VI. If the loser who said he was willing, prove angry and unwilling when it cometh to the paying, may I take it, or get it by law against his will?'

Answ. No, not in ordinary cases; because you may not turn a sport to covetousness, or breach of charity; but in case that it be a sport that hath cost you any thing, you may in justice take your charges, when prudence forbids it not.

Tit. 6. Cases of Conscience about Losing and Finding.

Quest. 1. If I find money or any thing lost, am I bound to seek out the owner, if he seek not after me? and how far am I bound to seek him?' 00

Answ. You are bound to use such reasonable means, as the nature of the case requireth, that the true owner may have his own again. He that dare keep another man's money, because he findeth it, it is like would steal, if he could do it as secretly. Finding gives you no property, if the owner can be found: do as you would be done by, and you may satisfy your conscience. If nearer inquiry will not serve, you are bound to get it cried in the market, or proclaimed in the church, or mentioned in the Curranto's that carry weekly news, or any probable way, which putteth you not upon unreasonable cost or labour.

Quest. 11. May I take any thing for the finding of it, as my due?'

Answ. You may demand so much as shall pay for any

labour or cost which you have been at about it, or finding out the owner. But no more as your due; though a moderate gratuity may be accepted, if he freely give it.

Quest. 111. May I desire to find money or any thing .else in my way; or may I be glad when I have found it?' Answ. You should first be unwilling that your neighbour should lose it, and be sorry that he hath lost it; but supposing that it be lost, you may moderately desire that you may find it rather than another; not with a covetous desire of the gain; but that you may faithfully gratify the owner in restoring it, or if he cannot be found may dispose of it as you ought. And you should be more sorry that it is lost, than glad that you find it, except for the owner. Quest. IV. If no owner can be found, may I not take it and use it as mine own?'

Answ. The laws of the land do usually regulate claims of property in such matters; where the law giveth it to the lord of the manor, it is his, and you must give it him. Where it giveth it to no other, it is his that findeth it; and occupancy will give him property. But so as it behoveth him to judge, if he be poor, that God's providence ordered it for his own supply; but if he be rich, that God sent it him but as to his steward, to give it to the poor.

Quest. v. If many be present when I find it, may I not wholly retain it to myself; or may I not conceal it from them if I can?'

Answ. If the law overrule the case, it must be obeyed; but if it do not, you may, if you can, conceal it, and thereby become the only finder, and take it as your own, if the owner be not found: but if you cannot conceal it at the time of finding, they that see it with you, are partly the finders as well as you; though perhaps the largest share be due to the occupant.

Quest. vi. If I trust my neighbour or servant with money or goods, or if another trust me, who must stand to the loss if they be lost?'

Answ. Here also the law of the land as regulating properties must be very much regarded; and especially the true meaning of the parties must be understood: if it was antecedently the expressed or implied meaning that one party in such or such a case should bear the loss, it must in