Damages
Damages whether to person or property, according to the Mosaic statutes. SEE FINE.
1. Injury to limb, in the case of a free Israelite, entailed an equal infliction (jus talionis) upon the same part of the body of the aggressor (Ex 21:23-25; Le 24:19 sq.; De 19:21; comp. Mt 5:38); in the case of a slave it effected his freedom (Exodus, 21:26 sq.; — comp. Philo, Opp. 2:332). Pecuniary satisfaction, however, in the former case, was a well-established custom (Josephus, Ant. 4:8, 35), so that retaliation was probably resorted to only in cases of intentional or malicious injury (comp. Ex 22:22 sq.; see Michaelis, Mos. Recht, v. 55 sq.). Greek legislation also (Diod. Sic. 12:17; Diog. Laert. 1:57), as well as the law of the Roman Twelve Tables (see Gell. 20:1; comp. Heinecc. Antiq. Jur. Rom. 4:18, 8, and Opusc. min. p. 213 sq.; on the Germanic usages, see Strodtmann, Deutche Alterth Umer, p. 45), sanctioned this natural and simple judicial observance of "like for like" (comp. Dougtaei Analect. 1:92, 11; Danz, in Menschen's N. Test. Talm. p. 488 sq.). Among the Israelites, however, it does not seem to have often been enforced (comp. Lightfoot,
Hor. Hebr. p. 282), and corporal injuries, at least under the monarchy, were almost always compromised by a sum of money (so generally among the Turks; see Hammer, Osman. Reich, 1:146 sq.). The Talmudical interpretation growing out of this enactment may be seen in Baba Kamma, 8:1. SEE RETALIATION.
2. Wounding a free person in an affray (where both parties might be presumed to be pretty nearly equally to blame, the injury, however, must have been inflicted with a stone or the fist, אֶגרוֹת; comp. Philo, 2:317, τῇ χειρί; not with a proper weapon, Josephus, Ant. 4:8, 33; also in a suddenly outbreaking quarrel between them that gave no evidence of long- meditated harm), which rendered the individual unfit for work, required compensation for the loss through sickness and the expense of cure (Ex 21:18 sq.; ver. 19 prescribes that this mulct should cease when the wounded person became able to go about again); should he die afterwards no further penalty was to be exacted (Philo, Opp. 2:317; comp. Baba Kamma, 8:1). More severe exaction followed when in a fray a pregnant woman was so injured as to suffer abortion, for then the law of life for life prevailed in full (Ex 21:22; according to Josephus, however, Ant. 4:8, 33, and Philo, Opp. 2:317, pecuniary reparation was allowed in such cases likewise). SEE PUNISHMENT.
3. Damage to one's property by cattle (Ex 22:5), or accidental spread of fire in the field (ver. 6), called for full remuneration of the loss (as also among the Romans; see Walter, Gesch. d. rom. Rechts, p. 812), and was to be paid for in kind, although a commutation in money certainly might obtain (Philo, Opp. 2:339). For fuller details, see the Talmudic treatise Baba Kamma, 4:1. When a hired animal or article was injured no special restitution was required (Ex 22:15). It was otherwise, however, with property placed in trust. SEE DEPOSIT. On the jurisdiction of all cases, SEE ELDER.
