secure; otherwise, no liability is incurred.

11. Liability is further incurred when the depositary fails to avert what would normally lead to the item’s destruction. Thus, if he is entrusted with a beast and neglects to feed it, he must make good the loss. If the owner explicitly prohibited him from feeding it, however, he is not liable according to the stronger view. Should the owner supply fodder, the depositary must use it; if not, he must demand its cost from the owner or the owner’s agent, and, failing either, from the judge. If he sends the animal with someone charged with watering it, he is not liable on the preponderant opinion. He must also air woollen garments so that moths do not spoil them, and may wear them when that is needed for their preservation.

12. Departing from the method of safekeeping stipulated by the owner and a resulting loss likewise make him liable. For example, if the owner says, “Do not lie on this chest,” yet he does so, and the chest collapses under his weight and its contents perish, he must pay for them. If the loss occurs for some unrelated reason, he is not liable on the sounder view. The same holds if the owner says, “Do not fasten it with two locks,” yet he does.

Likewise, if told, “Tie the coins inside your sleeve,” but he keeps them in his hand and they are lost, the established position is that loss through his sleep or forgetfulness entails liability, whereas seizure by a usurper does not. Placing them in his pocket instead of tying them in his sleeve involves no liability, whereas the reverse does.

When the owner hands him money in the marketplace without specifying how to keep it, and he either ties it in his sleeve while holding it or places it in his pocket, he is not liable. If he merely holds it in his hand, he is exempt should a usurper seize it, but liable if it is lost through negligence or sleep. If instructed, “Keep it in the house,” he must take it there and secure it; any delay without excuse makes him liable.

13. He is also liable if he misplaces the deposit—such as by leaving it somewhere that would not ordinarily be considered secure for that type of item—or if he discloses its whereabouts to a thief or to an official who would confiscate the owner’s property. If an oppressor coerces him into handing it over, the owner may, on the sounder view, hold him liable, and he may then seek recourse against the oppressor.

14. Using the deposit for personal benefit likewise constitutes betrayal and imposes liability: wearing a garment, riding an animal, taking a cloth in order to wear it, or money in order to spend it. Mere intent to misuse it, without action, does not create liability on the stronger opinion. Mixing the deposit with his own property so that it cannot be distinguished also entails liability, as does mingling the owner’s dirhams with his own according to the pre-ponderant view.

Once liability has attached—whether through misuse or some other cause—simply ceasing the misuse does not absolve him. He is cleared only if the owner later renews the entrustment, which, on the sounder opinion, releases him.

15. Whenever the owner demands his property, the depositary must return it by giving him unobstructed access to it. Any unjustified delay entails liability. If he claims that it has perished and cites no cause, or mentions a hidden cause such as theft, he is believed upon taking an oath.