Responsa for Bava Batra 184:10
ת"ש המוכר עבד לחברו ונמצא גנב או קוביוסטוס הגיעו לסטים מזויין או מוכתב למלכות אומר לו הרי שלך לפניך
But, [this is the answer], the majority of those who marry [as] virgins are known [to have so married] and since this one is not known, the majority principle in her case is impaired. Come and hear! [It has been taught:]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tosef. Kid. IV, Kid., 11a. ');"><sup>17</sup></span>
Teshuvot Maharam
Q. A, B, C, and D, were partners in a loan made by them. In repayment they received a quantity of silver which they divided among themselves by lot. Subsequently, A bought B's silver and sold it to merchants [probably Gentile merchants]. The latter broke up the silver and found it mixed with base metal. A averted a calamity by pacifying the merchants with gifts of money, thus preventing their bringing false accusations against him. A demands that B reimburse him with the price of the silver, and also compensate him for the money he had spent in pacifying the merchants.
A. The sale of the silver to A is void, since it was made in error. Similarly, the division of the silver among the partners is void, even though made by lot, since that too was made in error. However, B is not required to compensate A for the money he spent in pacifying the merchants, since B did not know, at the time of the sale, that his silver contained base metal. Moreover, even if B knew the contents of his silver, he would still be absolved from paying A the money he had given to the merchants, since he was only an indirect cause of A's loss, though he would be liable to punishment by the Heavenly Court.
SOURCES: P. 48, 49.
A. The sale of the silver to A is void, since it was made in error. Similarly, the division of the silver among the partners is void, even though made by lot, since that too was made in error. However, B is not required to compensate A for the money he spent in pacifying the merchants, since B did not know, at the time of the sale, that his silver contained base metal. Moreover, even if B knew the contents of his silver, he would still be absolved from paying A the money he had given to the merchants, since he was only an indirect cause of A's loss, though he would be liable to punishment by the Heavenly Court.
SOURCES: P. 48, 49.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy