Reference for Bava Kamma 223:7
תניא אידך הגוזל ומאכיל בניו פטורין מלשלם הניח לפניהם ואכלום בין גדולים בין קטנים חייבין קטנים מי מיחייבי לא יהא אלא דאזיק אזוקי א"ר פפא הכי קאמר הניח לפניהם ועדיין לא אכלום בין גדולים בין קטנים חייבין
Said Raba: What is meant is this, 'If the adults pleaded: "We know quite well the accounts which our father kept with you and are certain that there was no balance in your favour" they also would be exempt.'Another [Baraitha] taught: If one misappropriated [foodstuff] and fed his children, they would not be liable to repay. If, however, he left it [intact] to them and they consumed it, whether they were adults or minors, they would be liable. But why should minors be liable? They are surely in no worse a case than if they had wilfully done damage?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In which case they are exempt; cf. supra 87a. ');"><sup>12</sup></span> — Said R. Papa: What is meant is this: If, however he left it [intact] before them and they had not yet consumed it, whether they were adults or minors, they would be liable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Since it is in intact it is considered to be then in the possession of the owner.] ');"><sup>13</sup></span>