Article III: On the Mode by Which Restitution Must Be Made

326. General principle. - Restitution is to be made in that mode by which violated justice is repaired to equality, that is, in a mode apt that the thing arrive into the hands of the owner or creditor: for then the end is attained, namely equality. Therefore no special mode is prescribed, but it can be done:

a) openly, or also secretly and with the owner unaware; unless, however, scandal given by the injury must be repaired, namely, if restitution is owed from a public delict, or in restitution of reputation publicly injured and therefore to be publicly repaired;

b) immediately by oneself, or mediately through another worthy of faith. To this office a confessor is sometimes chosen by the penitent, who can accept, provided he acts prudently lest the seal be injured or other inconveniences arise. To avoid this he will be able to restore through the mediation of another priest or to transmit money from another place; and also to render the penitent more certain or to obtain testimony concerning the restitution made, so that every suspicion may thus be avoided;

c) directly, under the very form of restitution, or indirectly under the species of labor spontaneously and gratuitously undertaken for the utility of the owner, or of thrift, or of a truly useful donation, in which case, however, the debtor should take care lest the creditor repay another gift of almost equal value.

327. Questions. - A. What if the owner to whom restitution has been made under the species of donation again himself repays a gift to the one restoring?

R. 1) If it is established that the restitution made was the sole motive cause of this donation, the gift cannot be kept, because there is no donation which is made from error concerning the chief motive of the donation;

2. if it is established or deservedly presumed that the owner would have conferred that gift even without that restitution, the gift can be kept, although that restitution moved him somewhat to the gift;

3. sometimes, even if the gift cannot per se be kept, the debtor is excused from restoring it, for example, if the thing given is of slight value or cannot be returned without offense to the giver; yet generally the value of the gift can be restored secretly.

R. If someone has an express and in every way complete will of donating, then by the donation the obligation of restoring is not extinguished; otherwise, as prevailing, the will of implicitly restoring can be considered, because he is judged to have willed to pay debts before lavishing gifts, whence he also probably would have had this will explicitly if he had been conscious of the obligation of restoring.

Whence, if restitution is to be made to the poor, a great part of the alms given can be considered as restitution, provided they were donated not before but after the obligation was contracted.

328. In what way must those things be restored which have been taken away from the State or municipality?

If a legal and sufficiently safe mode is prescribed, so that what is restored certainly reaches the public treasury, that mode is to be employed.

But if a legal mode is not prescribed, but is sufficiently safe, it can be employed.¹ Or it can be done directly in another way through official administrators or prefects of taxes, provided enough care is taken that they do not retain it for themselves, for example, by warning several.

¹ In Belgium a mode was indicated, although not prescribed, by the letters of the minister of the treasury, 10 Mar. 1837: "The payments (of voluntary restitutions) will be received at the registration offices... The receiver will deliver to the person who makes the payment a receipt in triplicate... One... will be preserved by the person who has made the payment. The other two will be transmitted by him, one to the ministry of finances, the second to the Director of registration."

It can also be done indirectly, by destroying titles of public debt issued by the State or municipality, or postal tickets, provided that they belong to the government; but not by destroying bank notes, because they are only protected by the State.

Some say that restitution can be made to those who have been unjustly injured in goods by the civil power, such as religious or Catholic schools; but that means is not expedient because it easily exposes one to illusion, and because such injustice ought to be altogether undoubted toward a determinate institute, nor ought the injustice to have been condoned.

Others say that it can be made to the poor, whom it belongs to public society to assist; but that does not seem probable, because society satisfies this obligation in other ways, nor does it belong to private persons to dispose of public goods by private authority. Whence this means could not be employed unless no other way lies open by which restitution can safely be able to reach the public treasury.