Responsa for Bava Kamma 227:8
ואיכא דאמרי אם בא להחזיר יחזיר לבעלים ראשונים מ"ט יאוש כדי קני מיהו אי אמר אי אפשי בממון שאינו שלי מחזיר לבעלים הראשונים:
THE OWNER [OF BEES] IS ALLOWED TO WALK INTO THE FIELD OF HIS NEIGHBOUR FOR THE PURPOSE OF RESCUING HIS SWARM, THOUGH IF HE CAUSES DAMAGE HE WOULD HAVE TO PAY FOR THE AMOUNT OF DAMAGE HE DOES. HE MAY, HOWEVER, NOT CUT OFF HIS NEIGHBOUR'S BOUGH [UPON WHICH HIS BEES HAVE SETTLED] EDEN THOUGH WITH THE INTENTION OF PAYING HIM ITS VALUE: R. ISHMAEL THE SON OF R. JOHANAN B. BEROKA, HOWEVER, SAID THAT HE MAY EVEN CUT OFF HIS NEIGHBOUR'S BOUGH IF HE MEANS TO REPAY HIM THE VALUE. <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. A Tanna taught: If he was given [anything by customs-collectors] he would have to restore it to the original proprietors. This view thus maintains that Renunciation by itself does not transfer ownership<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As indeed maintained by R. Joseph supra p. 383, or even by Rabbah according to Tosaf. on B.K. 67b. ');"><sup>13</sup></span>
Explore responsa for Bava Kamma 227:8. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.