The Receiver

492. 1. A flatterer is said to be he who by praising or blaming moves another to inflict damage on the neighbor. He ordinarily has influence on the damage itself where the other would not have inflicted the damage without the flattery.

2. The obligations of the flatterer are the same as those of the one counseling: for he gives, as it were, clothed counsel, whose motives are generally taken from a false concept of worldly glory.

a. In order that the flatterer be bound to restitution, it is required that he advert that by his praises or reproaches he exists as a cause of the damage; but it is not required that he himself intend the damage.

b. It is clear that the flatterer is bound to restitution not only if he exists as cause of the damage, but also if by praise or blame he is the cause why the damage inflicted is not repaired.

493. 1. One receiving or furnishing recourse is said to be he who knowingly cooperates in the damage of the neighbor by furnishing security to the damager. This can happen in two ways: either by receiving another's thing or by protecting the author of the damage.

It belongs to the nature of one receiving that by his manner of acting he influence the will of the damager and determine it either to inflict damage again or to retain the thing taken away.

a. Therefore these are not receivers: alpha. those who receive criminals at home as friends and blood-relatives, or by reason of office as innkeepers, or to avert grave damage from themselves; beta. those who defend thieves or criminals in judgment in those things in which they themselves could defend themselves.

b. But these are receivers: alpha. innkeepers who receive thieves into lodging and conceal them lest they be captured; beta. tavern-keepers who accept from sons under family power money or other things secretly taken from their parents; gamma. parents who do not impede the thefts of sons and in this way add courage to them for repeating thefts.

2. The receiver is bound to repair damages of which he himself is the efficient cause; therefore if the one furnishing recourse brought it about that damage was inflicted or that the thing taken away was retained.

494. The participant is twofold: a. a participant in the prey is he who receives part of the thing unjustly taken away; b. a participant in the action is he who assists the principal damager in the unjust action itself.

1. The participant in the prey must restore that which he unjustly accepted: for he is an unjust possessor of another's thing; but he has no other obligation.

2. The participant in the action must repair the damages of which he himself is the efficacious and culpable cause. Which these are must be determined from the principles established concerning cooperation (n. 118 s.). Therefore if the cooperation is licit, no obligation of restitution arises from it.

Whether it is licit, in order to avoid one's own damage, immediately to cooperate in an action damaging to another, is said elsewhere (n. 118).

A receiver is he who, by providing refuge, security, or protection to an evil-doer, influences that one's damaging act. Receivers are, for example: 1° those who deliberately hide or buy stolen things; 2° those who conceal the goods of those who have ceded their goods in court or are about to do so; 3° one who receives or protects a thief formally, as is said, for example for the concealment of the theft; but not one who receives or protects him materially, for example as a wretched man, etc. (St. Alphonsus, III, 568).

He is bound to repair the damages inflicted just as the participant, of whom it will now be said.

What of recourse, or of one harboring, or providing refuge?

One harboring, namely he who knowingly and freely provides refuge and security to a robber, is held for the damages arising from this. For in this way he efficaciously and unjustly determines, or makes firmer, the will of the thief in the purpose either of stealing, or of not restoring, or of stealing again. In like manner merchants, and especially innkeepers, and all others who receive stolen things, the thefts of sons of the household, servants, etc., or conceal them, or even are accustomed to claim them for themselves in payment for merchandise, drinking bouts, etc., are held to restitution. - Among those harboring are not to be counted those who receive at home friends or blood relatives who are malefactors; nor those who conceal them under hope of amendment, or show them the way by which they can flee, when they are sought for prison or for death. L. 568.; St. Thomas, 2. 2, q. 62, a. 7.; C. A. 1314.

685. • 1. A receiver, namely one who knowingly and freely furnishes security to a robber, is held concerning the damages thence arising. For thus he efficaciously and unjustly determines, or makes firmer, the will of the thief in the proposal either of stealing, or of not restoring, or of stealing again.

2. Likewise merchants and especially innkeepers are held to restitution, who receive the thefts of sons under paternal power, servants, etc., or hide them, or even are accustomed to claim them for themselves as the price of merchandise, drinks, etc.

3. Among receivers are not to be counted those who receive at home friends or blood-relatives who are malefactors; nor those who conceal them under hope of amendment, or show them the way by which they can flee, when they are sought for prison or for death. - St. Lig., n. 568. - See Casus, n. 672, 674.

531. The receiver, or one furnishing refuge, is he who furnishes refuge or security to an evildoer, as such, or receives and keeps the things taken away by him. - I said: as such, because if he receives him not as an evildoer, but as a blood-relative, or friend, or by force of office (e.g., if the question concerns an innkeeper), and does not intend to furnish him aid, he is not properly a receiver.

Now the receiver is bound to restitution insofar as he makes the evildoer more secure in unjustly inflicting damage upon others, or is the cause why goods unjustly taken away are not restored.

532. Hence the following are obliged to restitution: (a) merchants and innkeepers who accept from children of families, servants, etc., money or things secretly taken away from parents or masters, because thus they favor thefts of this kind; (b) advocates who in a civil matter patronize manifestly unjust causes, or, in a criminal matter, an unjust accuser; but not those who, in a criminal trial, defend evildoers when these ought from the law itself to have a defender; (c) those who furnish help to a thief or another evildoer, by watching and warning if perhaps persons occur who are going to denounce or impede the crime; (d) tavern-keepers who receive thieves and conceal them lest they be seized.

107. The one providing recourse, or receiving, is he who provides refuge to an evildoer or thief as such,⁵¹ either a) so that he may escape safely from those pursuing, or b) so that he may be able to deposit stolen goods. I have said as such, because if he receives and favors him not as a thief or evildoer, but as a friend, or kinsman, or one worthy of mercy, he is not a receiver or one providing recourse. By deserved right receivers of evildoers of this kind are punished gravely by civil law; for they often cause greater damage than the evildoers or thieves themselves.⁵² But in the forum of conscience receivers are held to repairing damages, insofar as a) they render evildoers more secure for doing injuries, and b) they are the cause why the goods taken away are not restored. Receivers of this kind are especially several so-called "dealers in antiquities"⁵³ and dealers in old things,⁵⁴ who knowingly buy from servants, sons of families, and other men things taken away by theft. As to the mode of restitution, these receivers are to be treated like possessors in bad faith, or sometimes (if the thing bought is not certainly taken away by theft) like possessors in doubtful faith.⁵⁵

The one providing recourse not rarely also participates in the thing unjustly taken away. But then he is held to restitution not only as one providing recourse, but also as one participating in the prey; concerning this there will immediately be discussion.

⁵¹ Commonly Hehler, receleur, receiver of stolen goods.

⁵² Hence the common adage: "Without a receiver, no thief!" "If there were no receiver, there would be no thief."

⁵³ Altertumshändler, antiquaire.

⁵⁴ Althändler, Trödler, brocanteur.

⁵⁵ Cf. below n. 216 sqq.

314. A receiver or one furnishing recourse (receler, verhelen; proteger; beschermen) is one who furnishes to another security, convenience, protection, custody, so that unjust damage may be inflicted or so that damage already inflicted may not be repaired. He is, namely, one who in bad faith, by receiving another's thing or by protecting the author of damage, whether in person or in the instruments of his wrongdoing, impedes restitution, or even induces to harming.

Therefore someone can be a receiver in two ways, either by real recourse or patronage, when he receives, buys and sells, guards, or changes another's things which have been taken away; or by moral recourse or patronage, while he furnishes refuge or security to a malefactor as such: for one who would not receive him as a malefactor, but by title of blood relationship, friendship, mercy, or by reason of office, for example, of innkeeper, or of necessity in order to avoid inconvenience, and who did not intend to furnish aid to him, would not properly be a receiver.

One receiving is bound to restitution insofar as he renders the malefactor more secure in inflicting unjust damage or is the cause that a good unjustly taken away is not restored; and indeed, if he is an unjust possessor of the thing, he is bound in the first place by reason of the thing received, otherwise after the author of the damage, because he too was its efficacious cause, but a secondary one.

Receivers are and are obligated to restitution:

a) Those who before the deed offer malefactors their house as an asylum, or after the deed receive them, even as tavern-keepers, and hide them lest they be captured, or deliberately guard and hide their instruments and thefts.

b) Merchants and innkeepers who hide or accept as a price money or things taken away from parents or masters by sons of families or servants.

c) Dealers in old wares who indiscriminately buy at a cheap price all things brought to them, although they can easily suspect that they are stolen things.

d) Princes and military leaders who favor or protect soldiers or subjects exercising thefts, robberies, exactions, rapes.

e) Those who furnish aid to a malefactor, by watching and warning if perhaps those should come upon him who are about to denounce or impede the crime.

f) Advocates who patronize manifestly unjust civil cases, or unjust accusers in a criminal case; but not those who only defend malefactors so that they may be freed from punishment or from so great a punishment, since according to the law these can or even ought to have a defender.

A receiver, or one providing refuge, is he who knowingly and freely provides security to a robber or another damager. Concerning him these things must be established:

1st. One receiving is held for damages coming from his manner of acting. For one providing security efficaciously and unjustly determines the will of the thief, or makes it firmer, in the purpose either of stealing or of not restoring or of stealing again.

2nd. Likewise merchants and especially innkeepers are held to restitution who accept stolen goods of sons of families, servants, etc., or hide them, or even claim them for themselves as the price of merchandise, drinking-bouts, etc.

3rd. Among those receiving are not to be reckoned those who receive at home friends or blood-relatives who are evildoers; nor those who hide them under hope of amendment, or show them the way by which they can flee, when they are sought for prison or for death. Cf. St. Alphonsus, n. 568.

Receiver, that is, one granting recourse, or harborer, vulgarly receleur, is called whoever offers security, convenience, protection, custody to the wrongdoer, whence it comes that he either inflicts damage, or does not restore damage inflicted. And that this one too is held to restitution is manifest, since he is the cause of unjust acquisition or detention. Whence the common adage : « S'il n'y avait point de recéleur, il n'y aurait point de voleur »^{400 400} Si nullus esset receptor, fur nullus esset.

[Likewise held to restitution are merchants, and especially innkeepers, who receive thefts from sons of families, servants, hired workmen, and either conceal them in favor of such persons, or retain them for themselves as the price of goods and drinking bouts handed over by them.

He is not bound, however, who, after the theft is accomplished, aids the thief to flee, or receives him safely with his theft from friendship or from duty of office, as an innkeeper; provided he not thus flow into new thefts, offering thieves indiscriminately hope of refuge for the future. Nor likewise he who receives the thief from fear of grave damage⁴⁰¹ , for at his own grave loss he is not bound to avert another's damage.] ⁴⁰¹ S. Lig., Lib. IV, n. 568.

PARTAKER

[I. He who formally cooperates with another in a damaging action, concurring to the execution of his evil will, is always held to restitution. The reason is that the action of such a cooperator is positive, efficaciously and formally unjust, and therefore vested with all the conditions imposing restitution.

He who concurs only materially with another to inflicting damage can be excused from sin and from restitution, if namely he act from necessity or from a just and proportionate cause, without the mind of harming. The reason is that under such conditions cooperation is neither illicit nor unjust. 1° It is not illicit, although it be an aid to the damager, because for a just cause one can cooperate materially in another's sin; for, as was already said with the Angelic Doctor, when of one act there are two equally immediate effects, one good, the other evil, a just reason standing, the good effect can be intended and the evil permitted. 2° It is not unjust, although it inflict loss upon the owner of the thing; because, in a conflict

⁴⁰² of rights, the lesser must yield to the greater, as is plain from what was said concerning him who is in extreme necessity. Moreover, since each one has a right to preserve his own goods, no one can be forbidden that action which per se is necessary for averting his own damage, although indirectly and per accidens damage befall another from it.] ⁴⁰² Here q. 64, a. 7, c.

II. A partaker is twofold, in plunder and in crime. A partaker in plunder only is he who, after the damage is inflicted, receives part of the plunder or theft; and this one, if while receiving his part he did not know it was stolen, is held to restore only that part if it exists; or, if it no longer exists, only that by which he was made richer, because he is bound only by reason of a thing received. If he knew it was stolen, he is bound, if it exists, to give it back ; if it does not exist, an equivalent, even if he was not made richer thereby : because he is bound by reason of unjust acquisition. Whence he who in good faith drinks wine, not knowing it is stolen, is held only insofar as he spared his own wine or beer ; if knowingly, to its value, even if he spared nothing of his own wine or beer.

A partaker in crime is not only he who immediately per se exercises with another a damaging action, as if two together kill a man, despoil a house, etc.; for these are rather to be called co-executors than cooperators : but also those who offer help or instruments for inflicting damage, as they who lend ladders to the thief, apply them, hold them, support the climber, accompany him that they may hearten him, make false keys, keep watch, supply poison or arms to the thief against an enemy, carry off plunder already made farther away, etc. That these, while they do these things spontaneously and without urgent necessity, are held to restitution of the whole damage in solidum is established, even if without their aid the damage would have been inflicted, because in fact they efficaciously flow into the whole.

III. But the question is very entangled and torments theologians not a little : whether those who do these things through fear of death or of some other grave evil, as happens, v. g., among captives rowing for the Turks against Christians, among peasants carrying away the stolen plunder of soldiers, etc., sin and are bound to restitution ?

I say 1°: To execute through fear of death an immediate damaging action, such as throwing down walls, boring through a wall, seizing moneys and other movables, casting them out the window, driving cattle from stables, casting fire into a heap, etc., is illicit and begets the obligation of restoring; because such actions are intrinsically evil. For what else is this than stealing ? But what is intrinsically evil cannot be adorned by any good end, and evils must not be done that goods may come.

[This conclusion is indeed true and certain in itself. Nevertheless three cases are commonly admitted in which, on account of grave fear, immediate cooperation in inflicting damage on one's neighbor is licit, because then the owner is not reckoned reasonably unwilling : 1° if the cooperator can and will repair the damage; 2° if, the cooperation failing, the damage would nevertheless certainly and equally have been inflicted by the principal agent ; 3° if the damage be light with respect to the owner; for then he ought to bear it with equanimity out of charity ⁴⁰³ . Except however damage to life, because it is never licit directly to kill an innocent man, and damage to limbs, or mutilation, to which it is not licit to concur except to forestall the mutilated person's death.] ⁴⁰³ Gury, n. 687.

But whether it be licit to cooperate immediately, out of gravest fear, in inflicting grave damage upon goods of fortune, if the cooperator cannot or will not repair it? Many deny, because the cooperation is intrinsically evil, and the owner is bound neither by justice nor by charity to preserve another's life at so great a burden to himself. St. Liguori, considering the matter with respect to the owner and the thief ⁴⁰⁴ , distinguishes under the former. Either the cooperator fears only damage of his own of the same kind : he would act unjustly by cooperating to keep himself whole, unless he did so with the mind of compensating ; because the owner is not bound to impede a like loss of another at the sacrifice of his own means. Or damage of a higher order is feared, for example death, or mutilation, or grave injury, and the cooperation becomes licit; for otherwise the owner would be unreasonably unwilling. As to cooperation in the damager's sin, since it is merely material, it becomes licit from a just cause.] ⁴⁰⁴ Lib. IV, n. 571.

I say 2°: It seems to us more probable that actions which are not immediately per se damaging, but which precede or follow upon the damaging, such as lending ladders, keys, etc., opening the door, supporting the climber, rowing for the Turks against Christians, constructing embankments, carrying off farther the plunder already made, etc., if done through fear of death or of another evil far graver than the damage to be inflicted, are not illicit nor liable to restitution; because those actions are indifferent in themselves, and are done for a good end, namely for saving life. But it is not illicit to posit an action indifferent in itself for a good end, although evil follow from another's malice, especially when the good effect is of greater moment than the damage which follows from it per accidens.

If you say with the adversaries that these actions, although indifferent in themselves, nevertheless as done here and now are not indifferent, but truly concur to damage, I answer that they do not concur to damage as they come from the agent, but from the perverse use and evil will of the thief abusing them.

It is confirmed, the conclusion from an inconvenience. If the aforementioned actions were to be condemned, I do not see how nearly infinite actions which everywhere are admitted as licit could be excused. Thus he will sin and be liable to restitution who, driven by fear of death, returns a deposit of a sword to one demanding it for the slaughter of an enemy, or deposits money to one about to abuse it for usury, drunkenness, whoring, etc. Similarly the innkeeper will sin who supplies drink through fear of death to those about to make themselves drunk. Likewise the girl will sin who from an honest or even useful and necessary cause presents herself to the sight of a youth whom she knows will thence sin. Likewise guilty will be he who from hearing confessions, or from another honest action which he performs, foresees pollution ensuing, and six hundred other things, which no less than the aforementioned actions, as done here and now, concur to the evil effect. Nay more, actions which influence remotely will also be illicit. Thus he will sin and be liable to restitution who sells arms or poisons indiscriminately, knowing that some use them for others' ruin; similarly he who sells bird-limes, dice, playing cards, which he knows many abuse, and thus running through almost innumerable actions which occur continually : for these also are actions which influence in their own way into the evil effect, and although less proximately than the preceding ones, they nevertheless influence.

IV. You will ask whether, when several concur immediately to damage, v. g., despoil a vineyard, house, treasury, etc., they are bound to restitution of the whole in solidum.

XVI. Harbouring signifies the receivers of thieves and malefactors, to whom they afford refuge, security, and opportunity for committing evil, all of whom are liable to restitution. Those who after evils committed receive malefactors under the title of mercy, that they may help them to take flight, are free from the burden of restitution.