be five hundred dirms, {till there are not two diftindt bargains; and fo
likewife in the prefent inftance. The argument of the Zeeadat is
that in the above cafe there fubfifts two agreements; and that it is
Hnneceflary to confider them as one; for, if they be confidered as
two, it amounts merely to this, that it Would follow that the one is a
condition of the other, a conclufion which does not invalidate the
agreement, but rather the condition itfelf is invalid,— (whence it is
that i f the pawnee acquiefce in the agreement refpedting only one of
the two {laves, it is lawful.) It is otherwife in the cafe of fale% for
if there be two contradts of fale, it leads to this, that the one is a
condition of the other; a conclufion which would invalidate the fale
altogether.
An article If a perfon pawn any fpecific article into the hands of two people,
two perfons *n fecurity of a debt which he jointly owes to both, it is lawful;—
(in fecunty and in this cafe the article is held to be completely pledged into the
jointly owing hands of each of the creditors; becaufe the fpirit of the agreement is,
pledged in that the article is held entire and in one pledge:— nor does it hence
xtta to each; follow that the pledge is undefined, becaufe of the feparatenefs of
rights; for each has a claim to the whole,— the object of the agreement
being a detention in fecurity o f debt; and as that is a thing incapable
of feveralty, the pawn is therefore detained wholly in fecurity
of the debt of each. It is otherwife where a perfon beftows
any thing in gift to two people; for this is not lawful, according to
Haneefa, as the objedt of a gift is an endowment with right o f property,-
and two men cannot lawfully have each the complete property of one
thing, fince this would induce the confequence o f a moiety being ap-
and if they propriated to each indefinitely, which in gifts is not admiffible.— If, in
ftalteraatel13 Ojjj ca^e’ t^e parties agree to a Mahayat, or alternate poffeffion of the
each is in his pledge, each is, during his term o f poffeffion, a truftee on behalf of
behalf of'the” the other;— and if it be deftroyed, each is refponfible according to his
other. refpedive Ihare,— for upon this happening each is held to have received
a difcharge
a difcharge of his claim, a difcharge being capable of partition. If,
alfo, the pawner payoff the debt o f either, the article in that cafe re-!
mains wholly in pledge with the other, fince it was before completely
fo in the hands of each without any feparation. Analogous to this is
the detention of things which have been fold to two or more jointly
for one of the buyers, after paying his proportion of the price, is not;
entitled to take from, the merchant his fhare of the goods purchafed:
on the contrary, the merchant may detain the whole until fuch time
as he fhall have received the remaining part of the price from the other
purchafer.
I f two people, by one agreement, pawn a certain thing into the ••
hands of one perfon in fecurity of a debt which they jointly owe to
him, it is'lawful, and the thing fo pledged is detained in fecurity of
the whole of the debt. T h e pawnee is; moreover, at liberty to detain
the pledge until he receive a complete difcharge; for the two
having pawned the article together, the pawnee is therefore held to
have received a complete and undivided feizin of it.
If two perfons prefer a claim to a {lave in the poffeffion o f a third,
each feparately aflerting “ that the pofleffor had formerly completely
“ pawned the Have into his hands, and had afterwards borrowed or
ufurped him,” and each produce an evidence in fupport of his declaration,
the claims and evidences are null and inadmiffible; for each
of the claimants having maintained and fupported by evidence that the
pofleffor had pawned the {lave completely into his hands alone, it is
not, therefore, in the power of the Kdzee to decree him to either, as
it, is impoffible that the lame {lave ffiould be pawned wholly into the
hands of pne perfon, and at the fame time wholly into the hands of
another:— neither could he decree wholly the fubftance of the pawn to
anyone of them; fince he has no reafon to prefer one to the other;
»or could he decree each of them an half, as a pawn is indivifible. As*
V ol, IV. G g therefore,
I f two perfons,
refpec-
tively, claim,
an article
from a third,
in virtue o f
an alleged
pawn, and
both produce
evidence, the
claim o f both
is null.