Responsa for Bava Batra 47:9
איתמר חבית שצפה בנהר אמר רב נמצאת כנגד עיר שרובה ישראל מותר כנגד עיר שרובה נכרים אסירא ושמואל אמר אפילו נמצאת כנגד עיר שרובה ישראל אסירא אימור מהאי דקרא אתאי
It has been stated: If a barrel of wine is found floating on the river [Euphrates]. Rab says, if it is opposite a town where the majority of the inhabitants are Jews, the wine is permitted, and if opposite a town where the majority of the inhabitants are nonjews. the wine is prohibited. Samuel, however, says that even if it is found opposite a town where the majority of the inhabitants are Jews, it is prohibited, because it may be supposed to have come from Hai di-Kira.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Ihi di-Kira, the modern Hit (v. Obermeyer, Die Landschaft Babylonien, 59ff.). A town in the North of Babylonia which was outside the Jewish settlement.] ');"><sup>12</sup></span> May we say that the ground on which they join issue is the dictum of R. Hanina [that we follow the 'majority' in preference to 'nearness']. Samuel accepting it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And so this barrel is prohibited. because most barrels are from non-Jews. ');"><sup>13</sup></span>
Teshuvot Maharam
A. Though the majority of thieves are Gentiles, and the talmudic dictum regarding Pumbeditha (A.Z. 70a) does not apply to other places, the use of this wine is permitted nevertheless, for there is no evidence that thieves broke into the cellar. Thus the cellar was found locked, while thieves do not trouble themselves to lock a door after their work is done. Therefore we assume that a member of the household inserted the tap, a common enough occurrence. Each member of the household, though he knows that he himself did not tamper with the cask, is nevertheless permitted to drink the wine, for he may assume that one of the other members of the household inserted the tap.
SOURCES: B. p. 295, no. 389. Cf. Asher, Responsa 19, 1.