Restitution

Restitution is the act of restoring the balance or”proportion of equality” demanded by justice. Restitution is an act of commutative justice. It is occasioned by one person’s having what belongs to another (with or without his consent); it is enacted by giving back what is thus possessed, or,when this is impossible, by restoring its equivalent or value, sofar as may be done, to the true owner.

The safeguarding of justice is necessary for aman’s salvation. Hence, it is necessary for one who unjustlytakes, or holds, what belongs to another, to restore it. This obligation rests upon every person who has unjustly taken anything-property, good name, or any other good. The obligationbinds according to the measure of possibility; no one can be bound to do what is impossible.

In restoring goods of fortune (that is, goods which canbe priced, estimated in terms of money), the restorer is bound togive back the full value of what he took unjustly. And if a judge,in court of law, imposes a fine, over and above the amount taken,the restorer is required in conscience to pay that exact amount.

A man is bound to make restitution according to the extent of loss he has brought upon another. If he took an exact amount, he must restore that exact amount. If he took what is called potential gain from another, inasmuch as the theft prevented the rightful owner from making a profitable investment,he must make such restitution as is reasonable in view of all the conditions and circumstances of the case. But he is not required to pay all that the owner thinks he would have earned had his opportunity not been taken away by the theft. For, after all, the expected gain was never actually possessed by the victim of the theft, and the thief cannot be bound to restore what he has not taken.

Restitution is to be made to the person or persons from whom the thing has been taken. If this cannot be done, it must be made to the heirs of the true owners. And if this be impossible,the amount due must be expended in good works, such as gifts forthe care of the poor, or orphans-that is, it must be used for pious causes. In no case may the unjust taker or holder keep the stolen goods. It is a maxim of justice that “no one can be justly enriched by ill-gotten gain.”

One who takes a thing, justly or unjustly, is bound to restore it. One may take a thing justly, with the consent of the owner, by borrowing. Or one may take a thing justly as a favor tothe owner who wishes to commit it to his care. One takes a thingunjustly when he takes it without the consent of the owner. In every case, the thing taken is to be restored. If, however, a thing taken as a favor to the owner, is lost or destroyed without any fault on the part of the custodian, restitution is not required. When the depositor asks the favor of having his goods cared for, he takes the chance of unintended injury or loss. Of course, it he pays to have his goods cared for, and thus insures them,he is entitled to insurance.

All who have a real part in the unjust deed of taking goods without the consent of their owner, are involved in the obligation of making restitution. Those who have such a real partin the unjust deed are called cooperators in it. There are nine ways of cooperating in an evil deed: by counsel, by command,by consent, by flattery, by receiving, by partaking, by silence, by not preventing when possible, by not denouncing the evildoers. Those who are always bound to restitution by reason oftheir part in the theft are: (a) persons who command the theft; (b)persons who consent to it when refusal of their consent would prevent it; (c) those who receive ill-gotten goods; (d) those who actually take part in the act of thievery; (d) those who, having ability, authority, and duty to prevent the theft, fail to do so.In the other four cases (counsel, flattery, silence, not denouncing) cooperators are sometimes bound to restitution, and sometimes not, according to the real or merely incidental influence they exercised in the actual theft.

Restitution is to be made immediately if possible. To keep another’s property, and thus to deprive him ofits possession and use, is sinful, just as taking the property unjustly is sinful. Hence, without the permission of the owner, no delay, beyond that of sheer impossibility in making immediate restitution, is permissible.