Historic Ruling from a Merchant's Dispute: A Tale of Betrayal and Justice

Summer 1689. Europe is engulfed in what would later be known as the "Nine Years' War." At this time, the war was in its second year. Louis XIV, known as the "Sun King," was aggressively expanding the French kingdom in all directions, leading surrounding European nations to form a broad coalition to halt his expansionist ambitions. This coalition included the Germans, who at the time were part of the "Holy Roman Empire," alongside the English, Dutch, and Spanish.

Initially, the war saw several French victories. Louis' army crossed the Rhine to the east, laid siege to the Black Forest fortresses from Baden to Mannheim, capturing them all. To prevent future resistance, the French generals decided to destroy some key cities along the Rhine. Count Tessa burned Heidelberg, the university town; General Monclar flattened Mannheim; followed by Oppenheim; and on June 11, it was Worms' turn. Even the Jewish street was destroyed. Although the Germans later reclaimed the region, for some Jews, it was already too late.

During these tumultuous times, a Jewish merchant named Reuven from Oppenheim foresaw the events. He realized the French soldiers were likely to prevail and invade the Rhine cities, so he secretly moved all his wine, stored in a cellar, onto a riverboat. The boat, covered with tarps, was docked at a small, neglected pier. No one took notice of it. Early in the morning, it was set to sail towards Holland to sell the goods there. While the French were invading nearby cities, drinking up all the wine, and looting the food, Reuven planned to secure his wealth before the French reached Oppenheim.

However, another Jewish merchant, Yosef, intervened. Reuven owed Yosef a substantial sum of a thousand Ruble-Talers. He had a promissory note for the debt that had not yet been paid. When word reached Yosef that Reuven was secretly moving his assets, Yosef notified the authorities, claiming that his debtor was smuggling goods. The Rhine authorities detained the boat to confiscate it for Yosef. Yet, within a few days, the French arrived, enjoying the wine and wrecking everything, including the boat.

Reuven felt deeply betrayed by Yosef's actions, accusing him of being a true "slanderer." Yosef had reported Reuven to the authorities, causing him a significant loss. In defense, Yosef insisted that he acted rightly as once Reuven's goods left the city, Yosef had no hope of getting his money back.

The question was forwarded to the great Rabbi Yair Chaim Bachrach, a leader of German Jewry, known as the Chavot Yair. The "Chavot Yair" documented this case in his book, "Siman Mem-Heh," noting that he had a secret rule "not to respond generally." As he was (likely displaced due to the war) on the move, he could not provide a response but wrote the answer for himself, a learning tool for future rulings.

The decision depended on whether Yosef's actions were intentional or accidental. If intentional, the sages imposed a penalty. The "Chavot Yair" concluded that Yosef's actions were not intentional, as he did not aim to harm Reuven but only sought what was due, and the French looting was certainly not his intention. Another principle is that for something unusual, the sages do not impose a ruling, and the French looting was deemed unusual. Even though there may have been predictable concerns, generally speaking, it remained an unlikely event.

Furthermore, the "Chavot Yair" mentioned that he had heard the French looters sometimes paid for what they took, so there was no definite harm, just potential harm caused by Yosef's actions; clearly, even if the wine reached Holland, it would have been sold hastily at a loss.

In practice, Reuven was not seeking compensation from Yosef but wanted to absolve his debt, arguing if there is doubt, then "the burden of proof lies on the claimant." If Yosef might have caused harm, perhaps Reuven no longer owed him. However, the "Chavot Yair" dismissed this claim. "Seizing" was ineffective here; Reuven had to pay Yosef the thousand Rubles he owed.

What happened eventually? The "Chavot Yair" noted that he learned months later that Reuven and Yosef opted for arbitration, and the arbitrators decided Reuven must pay. In his view, "this was a big mistake," and he sent them a letter expressing his opinion.