The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1884-08-30

DlllUleS ne nau lucuTTeu prior W HIS uSeltit
Where, however, some one special article
had been pledged, or rather hypothetical,
as security for money lent, the article
named could be claimed in default of pay
ment by the heritors of the deceased.
UNDoUBTED PROOF REQUIRED.
In every case the law required proof of
debt The creditor was expected to bring
either the kinyan (deed of acknowledge
ment1 or two competent witnesses; although,
as we have before explained, the defendant
in a contested case might take the Biblical
h-deoraithd- order to clear himself
of liability, or the plaintiff might swear
derab6anan, the Rabbinical oath, in order
to compel payment. Yet the Rabbins
looked with suspicion upon the alternatives
named. Apart from that they regarded,
too, the sinfulness of an oath. The Che
mara constantly advises men never to lend
money except in the presence of witnesses,
or without receiving the legal acknowledge
ment of indebtedness from the borrower.
"He who lends money in the absence Of
witnesses" says Rab Judah in the name
of Rab, ''transgresses the negative precept,
Thou shalt not put stumbling block be-
fore the blind for he tempts the borrower
to deny the debt" So, too, another Rabbi,
Risch Lakisch, points out, ''it causes SLAM
DER" for one party denying the debt com
pels the other to bring an action. One
party has to swear, and naturally the adj
herents of one side regard those on the
other as perjured. Thus quarrels are
spread, and SANDER is result. Apropos
of this caution, the famous Rab Asche, to
test his colleague, sent to Rabbina, the
commentator, one Friday evening, late,
when, of course, all were busy, it being
near to Sabbath, asking for loan of ten
zuzim, which he urgently required. Rab
bina sent back answer, Bring witnesses
and we will sign the note of hand. " Rab
Asche replied, 'What bring witnesses!
Do l not inspire sufficient confidence to
obviate the necessity of such procedure ?"
Rabbinas remark thereupon was brief =
"You less than anybody else. You are so
intently engaged in study and so constantly
preoccupied that you would easily forget
the fact of your Indebtedness. The opin-
ion of the Rabbins generally anent the lend
ing of money under the circumstances adj
verted upon is well expressed in pithy be-
raitha: "Thrce persons there are who
weep, and none can console them; he who
sets over himself a master; he who allows
himself to be ruled by his wife, and he who
lends money without witnesses.
MODES OF PROCEEDING IN CASE OF
SEIZURE.
Debts were chargeable against real estate,
houses and lands, as well as personal chat
tells. If the movable belongings u pom
which creditor levied an execution proved
insufficient to liquidate the amount UNPAID,
the tribunal before whom the matter came
was empowered to order the sale IF sufficient
land to make up the required balance In
all cases where it was necessary to seize
the land belonging to a debtor, the mode
of procedure generally adopted was some
what as follows Assuming, of course, that
the creditor had applied for his money and
had been refused; ting usual application had
been made to the local tribunal to enforce
payment in cash; Hhe defendant had been
cited, and, being obdurate, refused to APP
pear-tacitly declining payment court
would therefore give the creditor an order
of the judges called tirpha, which entitled
him to seize and enter upon and ascertain
all necessary particulars respecting the
debtor1s fields and farms, wherever and in
whatever district they were situate. The
extent and nature Of these holdings being
discovered, the creditor attended before the
tribunal of the division wherein the pro-
perty of any particular portion thereof was
compromised. He handed over to tho
judges here the act tirpha. This document
the court destroyed. Instead thereof they
delivered to him the deed designated
Gdrachthd This was an authorization that
entitled him to enter upon and possess the
property therein specified, 1t would, how
ever, frequently happen that the land thus
seized by the pursuer would be worth more
or perhaps less than the amount of the
debt for which it was taken. In such
instances the tribunal ordered the property
to be surveyed and valued by competent
persons 1t was then divided. Another
instrument, known as schund, deed of es-
innate, was thereupon drawn up. The
previous deed of adraeIthG, or occupation,
was now delivered up to the judges, the
creditor receiving in return the new docu-
ment, sctuma. This finally entitled him
to take possession of portion of land, the
value of which was exactly proportioned to
the amount of the debt unpaid. The OBJ
!. ILL IA Loco Ill
right to reocupy his field or farm. A ira
dition of the doctors of the city of Nehardea
whose practices and precedents are often
quoted in the Talmud-states that the bor-
rover could at any time within twelve
months regain possession of his property
ON payment of the amount in respect of
which it was disposed of. One of the most
eminent of the Amoriam, Amemar, thinks
otherwise. Il am myself of Nehardea,
he says, ''and | maintain that the debtor
retains for ever the right to repurchase his
property from those who have legally seized
and occupied it. The Ghemara itself
adopts this opinion too, that an Israelite
could always pay his debts and regain what
had once before been his own. Character
istically, this concession in favor of debtors
is attached to the verset of Deuteronomy,
''Thou shalt do what is just and righteous
in the eyes of the Eternal Poverty
would in the majority of cases be the cause
of non-payment of debt for which land
had been seized. And the Talmudists
held that it was good deed to aid, by
privilege Of this kind, the man who had
become poor, but had again risen in the
world to possess his own again,
The Work of Single Hair.