crime committed
with
the feller.
of the purchafer, for a crime he had committed whiift in the poflef-
fion of the feller; Haneefa being: of opinion: that the purchafer is entitled
tq a reftitution of the whole of the price; and: the two difciples,
that he is entitled only :to the difference between the value of
the flave before his blood has become neutral, and that which' he
bears after it has been neutral*. In -fhort, according to Ha-
neefa, the exiftenee of a caufe of mutilation or death is equivalent
to a. claim of-right whereas,, according to, the two difciples, it is
equivalent :to-a defepl., The xeafoning of the two difciples is.thjit the
caufe only of mutilation or death occurred,w;jth the feller, but not the
afliual 'death or mutilation i t f e l f— now, thh. êxiftepce of a caufe of
death or mutilation is not repugnant to the fubjefi bein^ ■ property,
the have, therefore, notwithftanding the exiftenee ofthe caufe of mutilation
or death, is neverthelefs property, and capable of being the
fubjeet of a fale; as, however, a flave in whom exifts a caufe of
death or mutilation is defoEliw, it follows that the purchafer is entitled
to receive from the feller a compenfation for the deficiency, where
the return has become impracticable:; and in either of thefe inflances
the return is impracticable;— where he fuffers death evidently; and
alfo where he fuffers mutilation ; becaufe fuch mutilation is. a d'efeCt
that has taken place in the hands of the purchafer;— in the fame
;manner as where a perfon purchafes a pregnant female flave, being
ignorant of the circumflance, and the flave dies in labour, in. which cafe
the purchafer is entitled only to a compenfation: for the difference between
the price which file bore when not pregnant, and that which
fhe bore when pregnant. T h e reafoning of Haneefa is, that the
caufe of mutilation and death occurred with the feller; and as a caufe
induces its effefts, the death or mutilation muff be referred to the
.period ofthe caufe. The cafe is, therefore, the fame as if a perfon
* T h a t is, has become forfeited' to .the l a w , and confequently liable to be fhed
without refponfibility.
t In other words, is the fame, in effect, as i f the flave, after the purchafe, fhould
,prove to be the property o f another perfon•
were
were to ufurp a flave, and the'flave, vvhiift in his pofleflion, were to
commit a crime inducing mutilation or death, and the ufurper then .
reflate him to his proper owner ; and the flave then fuffer death or
mutilation ; for in that cafe the u fur per -would.be refponfible for the '
whole of the value to the owner ; in the fame manner as he would
have been in cafe of the flave’s having been put to death whiift in his
own pofleflion ; as the caufe, in either.inftance, occurred with him.
With refp.eiftto the cafe of pregnancy, adduced by the two difciples,
it is not admitted by Haneefa. If, however, it were admitted, ftill
there is no analogy between it and the cafe in queftion, fince
pregnancy is.the caufe of delivery:, and not o f death, except in a few
inflances. ." ’ . . :
I f a flave. firft commit theft with the feller,, and then, after be- Cafeofaflave
in'g fold, commit theft with the purchafer, and afterwards fuffer am- for"
putation for both thefts, in that cafe, according to the two difciples* ,wo thefts>.
the purchafer is. entitled to the difference of relative value of the flave ed with the
at the time of -fale, and after the commiflion of the,fécond theft.
According to Haneefa, on the other hand, the purchafer is not en- tileJ‘urchn/er.
titled to return him, unlefs. the feller fhould o f his .own accord c©nfent
to receive him.: but he is entitled to a compenfation for the fourth
o f his value; and if the feller fhould himfelf agree to receive him, in
that cafe he mull: reftore to the purchafer three fourths of his price;
becaufe the hand of a .man is efteemed equal to half his perfon; and
as, in this cafe, the hand is forfeited for the commiffion of two
thefts, it foflows that a deduction of one quarter ought to be made
on account of the theft committed whiift in the poffeflion of the
purchafer.
If a flave, having been feverally fold, and delivered to three differ- Cafe of a
■ ent perlons, fhould then fuffer amputation for a theft which he had ?ave» ^ter :
committed whiift m the poftèffion of the firft feller, and of which the fold,buffering
■ different purchafers were not apprized at the period of concluding fOT^theft"
V ql. If. I f f their