§ 2. ON THOSE WHO COOPERATE NEGATIVELY

NOTIONS. Negative cooperators are those who, on account of culpable negligence in their own office, are the cause why damage is unjustly inflicted on one's neighbor. Of this sort are the mute, the one not resisting, the one not manifesting.

The mute is said to be he who before the damaging is silent and does not warn, while he is held to warn. The one not resisting, he who, while damage is being inflicted, does not impede it, although he is held to impede. The one not manifesting, he who after the damage has been inflicted, does not denounce it, although he is held to denounce.

Negative cooperators are called some properly, others improperly. Negative cooperators properly so called are only those who from justice, from an office which has had its origin at least from a quasi-contract, must impede the damage of one's neighbor, and do not satisfy their duty; negative cooperators improperly so called are those who from other motives, for example of charity, legal justice, must avert these damages, and culpably do not avert them.

988. PRINCIPLES. I. Negative cooperators properly so called are held concerning another's damage if they could morally have impeded it and culpably omitted it. This is the conclusion of the principles in n. 949.

It is said 1. Could morally have done so, that is, with efficacy and without excessive inconvenience, respect being had to the gravity of the damage to be impeded, to the stipend accepted, etc., according to the estimation of prudent persons. The reason is that laws and pacts are accustomed to be accepted and observed so benignly (cf. ibid., Condition 3). Hence it happens that negative cooperators are often excused, because of grave fear, from reparation of damage (Lehmkuhl, Cas. consc., n. 737).

2. And culpably omitted; because, without theological fault, there cannot be an obligation of restoring under the title of damaging, as was said in the preceding number. In doubt, the things have force which we noted in the same place, added 4. Cf. St. Alph., II, 40; III, 573; IV, 237.

From these things resolve: 1. A prince, magistrate, commander of war are held to restitution of damages which are given by wild beasts, robbers, soldiers because of their culpable negligence. - Likewise counselors, canons silent, absenting themselves, not impeding an inequitable constitution or election. Likewise guardians, administrators of goods, etc., not impeding damages coming upon pupils, minors, churches. Likewise guardians of mountains, vineyards, forests, fields, fishponds, who do not impede damages, or do not manifest those done (compare n. 968, 2). Servants guarding the goods of the owner, specially committed to them, if they do not impede damages from outsiders. Likewise princes and owners of territories, if they know that public roads are infested by robbers and, when they can, do not impede, are held to compensate merchants and other travelers for the damages which they receive from those men.

2. A counselor, deputy, senator, etc., who in casting suffrages was the last voter and foresaw that it would happen that the unjust suffrage of others would be invalidated, weakened, or changed, is held to restitution if he omitted the voting. But in doubt whether it would have happened that others would retract themselves, they are presumed going to change counsel if they erred inculpably; otherwise if culpably, because then their depraved will possesses (III, 566).

Note. Not rarely it happens that stipended officials concur in inflicting damages not only by omission, but also by action. In this case, they are held to restitution under a twofold title, namely because of negative and positive cooperation.

989. II. Negative cooperators improperly so called indeed sin if they do not impede the damage of one's neighbor without grave inconvenience; but they are not held to restitution unless they are bound by the sentence of a judge. Thus commonly. Recall the things said in n. 949, Condition 1.

Hence: 1. A father, husband, master is not held concerning damages of subjects, unless he must forestall them from a special and public office; or unless by his silence he seems positively to approve those causing damage; or unless by his negligence he seems to intend the damage. The same must be said of a teacher toward disciples, of a confessor toward penitents, and generally of every Superior not publicly constituted for repelling the temporal damages of inferiors. 2. Nevertheless, positive law, and therefore the judge, deservedly takes notice against some of them, for example against parents, in order to render them more vigilant, as we have already said l. c., Condition 3, note 1 (cf. St. Alph., III, 40; Gousset, I, 963 seqq.).