Another case that came before Rav Eliyohu Chaim of Lodz was that of a man who found a wallet: “About a month ago, as I walked down the street I found a wallet and picked it up. At home I counted the money and discovered that it contained a thousand rubles,” he told the Rav. “The next day I read in the paper that the Polish nobleman had lost his wallet and offered a reward for its return. I promptly returned the wallet but the Poritz grew enraged and yelled at me, ‘Jewish thief! This wallet contained thousands of rubles and you give it back with only one thousand!’ He began cursing and threatening me, and now he has sued me in secular court. Rav, what am I to do?! Please help!”
The Rav calmed him down and asked if he had a lawyer to represent his case. “Yes, I do,” answered the finder.
“Please ask him to meet with me,” requested the Rav.
The day of the trial arrived and in the court stood the nobleman, who stated his case before the judge. “I lost my wallet containing thousands of rubles and this Jew found it and returned it with only one thousand rubles!”
The Jew tried to defend himself and declared that the wallet he had found contained only one thousand rubles. The defense attorney tried to defend his client by presenting a logical argument: “Your Honor, if someone finds a lost object and returns it, why would he proceed to steal some of the money? He could just as easily have kept the entire wallet and no one would have been any the wiser!”
“Your Highness,” the defense attorney turned to the Poritz, “can you swear that you lost a wallet containing thousands of rubles?”
“Of course!” declared the nobleman and at once he swore to the effect before the judges and took an oath.
“Your Honors, surely the Poritz’s oath must stand and be accepted as truth. Well, then, this surely proves that the wallet my client found must be in fact a different wallet and not the one belonging to the Poritz at all. It is logical and sound to assume that he who returns a lost object is a truthful, honest man. Thieves and cheats wouldn’t return the money at all, and if this wallet only contained a thousand rubles it is reasonable to assume it is not the wallet that the Poritz lost – but a different wallet! I ask the Poritz to return the wallet to my client, since his own oath proves that it is not his!”
The Poritz’s face flushed. The judges concluded that he must have lied under oath and, not daring or wishing to accuse him of having sworn falsely, they accepted the attorney’s line of defense and ruled in favor of the Jew. The wallet containing one thousand rubles was returned to the Jew, he was released, the case closed. Rav Eliyohu Chaim Meisel’s advice had brought about justice once again. (Anaf Etz Avos p. 65–66)
