Lesson # 259 •Transporter of Objects

The last lessons discussed the paid bailee. A transporter of objects for pay is a paid bailee while the object is in his custody from the time of delivery to him or pick up of the item by him until delivery to the ultimate destination.

For example, Federal Express or the Post office. A paid bailee, besides being liable for negligence in handling the object, is also liable for loss occasioned by theft or other loss of the object, except force majeure. If this applied to the transporter, whether a private individual or group, they might be reluctant to transport objects unless they could charge very high prices, since they would be liable for most types of loss. To enable commerce to flourish, there were special laws enacted for transporters of goods; they were relieved of liability in most cases and their liability was halved in other cases. The entire purpose of all law is to make the law abider a better person in his relationship with his fellow man, resulting in a better relationship with his Maker. Thus the Sages of the Talmud enacted legislation regarding the liability of the transporter for hire.

The transporter who is negligent is still fully liable for the loss occasioned by his negligence. Absent negligence, the Rabbis set up standards that only Beth Din can administer depending on the facts of each case, that is, depending on the strength of the transporter and the weight of the object. A few examples:
1. Assume an object that is normal for a transporter of this strength to carry; the weight is not too heavy for him to carry alone. The most common way for an object such as a barrel to be broken is where the transporter slips and the barrel falls and breaks. In such instance, if he was not negligent, he is not liable for the loss; if he was negligent he is liable for the loss.
2. Assume the load was somewhat heavy for him to carry alone, yet he did carry it alone, such as hanging two loads at ends of a pole that he carries over his shoulders, such as is done by water carriers. If he now falls under the load or trips, he is liable for 50% of the loss.
3. Assume that the load was too heavy for him to carry but he nevertheless picks up and carries such a load and this contributes to his falling, resulting in the breakage of the barrel. There is negligence on his part and he is fully liable for the loss occasioned.

In the first two situation, either there are witnesses to testify that the loss was not occasioned by his negligence, or, absent witnesses, the transporter takes an oath that the loss was not occasioned by his negligence and he has no liability to the owner of the object.

There is an opinion that the transporter is not liable only if he slipped or tripped upon an object such as on a stone or a piece of wood or a break in the surface of the street or there was an incline in the street. However, if there was nothing in the street to make him slip or trip and the street surface was level, he is liable if he slipped or tripped and broke the barrel.
The Lessened Liability of 2 Persons Transporting the Object

The Rabbis also instituted another law, regarding these matters, that if two people carry a barrel on a pole and it breaks, they are not liable to the owner for the loss of the object (except if they were negligent). There is also authority that they together pay one-half of the value of the barrel. Either there are witnesses to testify that the loss was not occasioned by their negligence, or absent witnesses, the transporters both take oaths that the loss was not occasioned by their negligence and they are not liable or their liability is limited to 50% of the loss according to the second opinion mentioned above.

As seen above, there are times when the transporter is liable to the owner, whether for the entire value of the object lost or 50%. There are two major different opinions as to how to compute the loss. In the codes the question arises as follows: A barrel of wine is worth $4 a barrel on market days and $3 a barrel on all other days. The barrel of wine is entirely lost. What is the measure of damages?

View 1: This view holds that the measure of damages is determined by the value of the object at the moment that the loss occurs. Thus, if the loss occurs on market day; the transporter must pay $4 for the barrel (or $2 if he has to pay only 50% as above stated); if the loss occurs on any other day; he pays $3 (or $1.50 where he has to pay only 50%). The day on which payment is made is of no consequence. If the loss occurred on a market day; the transporter may return a barrel of wine to the owner on the market day. However, if the loss occurred on a market day; he cannot return a barrel on any other day and tell the owner to wait until market day when it will be worth $4.

View 2: The day of payment determines the amount of the payment; thus, if the payment is made on a market day; the transporter must pay $4 or give the owner a barrel of wine on that day and if made on any other day; he must pay $3 or give the owner a barrel of wine on that day.

According to both views, the transporter may deduct from the payment all the expenses that the owner would have had in selling the wine.
The following incident is related in the Talmud (Baba Metzia 83a) Raba b. R' Huna hired some porters to carry a barrel of wine and they negligently broke the barrel of wine. He seized their garments to compensate himself for the loss occasioned by the porters. They complained to a great rabbi who ordered Raba to return the garments to the porters. When Raba asked the great rabbi if this was the law; he was told he would have to act so in furtherance of the verse in Proverbs (2:20): "That thou mayest walk in the way of good men.” The porters, after they obtained their garments, once again came to the great rabbi and complained that they had not been paid for the work they did although the work performed caused Raba great loss. The great rabbi instructed Raba to pay the porters. Once again Raba asked the rabbi if this was the law, and the rabbi quoted the last half of the verse cited before: "...and keep the path of righteous:'
I cite this here since the incident deals with porters. However, there is no doubt in my mind that this should be the prime consideration in all of man's dealings with man. See my essay Lifnim M'Shurat HaDin, Council of Young Israel Rabbis Annual Volume, Jerusalem 1988.

The subject matter of this lesson is more fully discussed in volume VIII chapters 304 of A Restatement of Rabbinic Civil Law by E. Quint. Copies of all volumes can be purchased via email: orders@gefenpublishing.com and via website: www.israelbooks.com and at local Judaica bookstores. Questions to quint@inter.net.il

[The Parshat Vayeitzei Homepage]
[The TORAH tidbits Homepage] [How to use TORAH tidbits]
[About The OU/NCSY Israel Center] [About TORAH tidbits]
[www.ou.org]