Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Choshen Mishpat/301

Paragraph 1- The three laws stated in the Torah regarding the four watchmen do not apply to real property, slaves, documents, gentile-property or hekdesh, whether of intrinsic holiness or that of the treasury. An unpaid watchman would not swear and a paid watchman, renter or borrower would not pay. The paid watchman would, however, lose his wages until he swore that he watched properly. Similarly, they would even be exempt from negligence, and this is how we rule. There are those who rule the watchman would be liable for negligence. In all these cases, with the exception of hekdesh, they would even be exempt from the oath that the item is not in their possession. ''See above 66:30. If a watchman gave to another watchman in one of the foregoing cases, he would be liable, because it is worse than negligence. There are those who disagree. If one borrows a house and it burns down, he is exempt from paying because it is real property.''

Paragraph 2- This that we do not swear on the foregoing is only if swearing on them alone. We would, however, have them swear on such items rolled in with another oath.

Paragraph 3- Although we said we do not swear on the foregoing, that is only true with respect to the biblical oath. We would, however, have them swear a heses oath if there was a certain claim.

Paragraph 4- In all these cases, if they made a kinyan from the watchman that he would responsible, he would be liable.

Paragraph 5- If one gives another something attached to the ground to watch, it has the status of real property, even grapes that are ready to be harvested.

Paragraph 6- If one had money of the poor or money collected for redeeming captives deposited with him, and he was negligent and the money was stolen, he would be exempt, because the verse says, “to guard,” and not to distribute to the poor, and it is money with no claimant. When is this true? Where the money was not deposited for the poor of this location or for known captives. If it was deposited for these poor or these captives, however, and it is set aside for them, it is money that has claimants and the watchman must pay if he was negligent or swear that he was not negligent and acted like other watchmen. Similarly, if the treasurer tells a watchman to watch for him, he would be liable like any other watchman.

Paragraph 7- If one had money for redeeming captives deposited with him and thieves came and he rescued himself with the captive-money, whether he is exempt was discussed in 292:9.

Paragraph 8- If one has orphans’ money deposited with him, it has the status of money of anyone else and he would be prohibited from using it.

Paragraph 9- If a gentile deposited and then converted, all the laws of watchmen will not apply until he is a Jew from beginning to end. The same is true with non-hekdesh that was later consecrated in the watchmen’s possession.

Paragraph 10- A watchman is only liable if he was given the item to watch. If he was given it to destroy, however, he would be exempt because we deduce “to watch,” to mean not to tear or destroy. This is true only where he originally received it to tear or destroy. If it originally came to him to be watched and the owner subsequently said to tear it, however, he would be liable unless the owner said it on the condition he be exempt.