Reference for Bava Metzia 83:13
נימא ליה לדידיה זיל שלים אמר
a dog cannot search it out.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Pes. 31b. ');"><sup>20</sup></span> And it was taught [thereon]: How far is the searching of a dog? Three handbreadths.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the leaven must be covered by not less than three handbreadths of debris; otherwise a dog can search it out, and it would therefore be necessary to remove the debris and destroy the leaven. ');"><sup>21</sup></span> How is it here?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In respect to placing money in the earth. ');"><sup>22</sup></span> Do we require [that it shall be covered by] three handbreadths or not? — There, he replied, we require three handbreadths on account of the smell [of the leaven];<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the leaven is covered by less, a dog can smell it. ');"><sup>23</sup></span> but here [it is put into the earth] in order to cover it from the eye; therefore three handbreadths are not required. And how much [is necessary]? — Said Rafram of Sikkara:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A town S. of Mahuza. ');"><sup>24</sup></span> one handbreadth. A certain man deposited money with his neighbour, who placed it in a cot of bulrushes.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So Jast. Rashi: in a fowler's trap. ');"><sup>25</sup></span> Then it was stolen. Said R. Joseph: Though it was proper care in respect to thieves,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who would normally not think of looking there for it. ');"><sup>26</sup></span> yet it was negligence in respect to fire: hence the beginning [of the trusteeship] was with negligence though its end was through an accident, [and therefore] he is liable. Others Say: Though it was negligence in respect to fire, it was due care in respect to thieves, and when its beginning is with negligence and its end through an accident, he [the bailee] is not liable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 36b. ');"><sup>27</sup></span> And the law is that when the beginning thereof is with negligence and the end through an accident, he is responsible. A certain man deposited money with his neighbour. On his demanding, 'Give me my money,' he replied, 'I do not know where I put it.' So he went before Raba, [who] said to him: Every [plea of] 'I do not know' constitutes negligence: go and pay him. A certain man deposited money with his neighbour, who entrusted it to his mother; she put it in her work basket and it was stolen. Said Raba: What ruling shall judges give in this case? Shall we say to him, 'Go and repay'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because if a bailee entrusts the deposit to another he is responsible. ');"><sup>28</sup></span> Then he can reply,