[首发] 布莱克斯通《英格兰法律解释》第一卷第14章翻译（草稿）

WIND

BOOK 1, CHAPTER 14
OF MASTER AND SERVANT
雇主与雇员（主人和仆人）

HAVING thus commented on the rights and duties of persons, as standing in the public relations of magistrates and people; the method I have marked out now leads me to consider their rights and duties in private economical relations.
站在管理者和人们的公共关系（public relation）的角度，对人身的权利和责任进行解释之后；前面我已经指出的方法现在将引导我来考虑他们在私人经济关系中的权利和责任。

WIND

THE three great relations in private life are, 1. That of master and servant; which is founded in convenience, whereby a man is directed to call in the assistance of others, where his own skill and labor will not be sufficient to answer the cares incumbent upon him. 2. That of husband and wife; which is founded in nature, but modified by civil society: the one directing man to continue and multiply his species, the other prescribing the manner in which that natural impulse must be confined and regulated. 3. That of parent and child; which is consequential to that of marriage, being its principal end and design: and it is by virtue of this relation that infants are protected, maintained, and educated. But, since the parents, on whom this care is primarily incumbent, may be snatched away by death or otherwise, before they have completed their duty, the law has therefore provided a fourth relation; 4. That of guardian and ward; which is a kind of artificial parentage, in order to supply the deficiency, whenever it happens, of the natural. Of all these relations in their order.

在一个人的生命中有三种重要的关系，1. 雇主与雇员的关系；这种关系基于相互的便利，由此当一个人的技能和劳动不足以承担依赖于他的照料的时候，可以呼请他人的协助。2. 丈夫与妻子的关系；这种关系基于自然，不过由世俗社会予以修正：前者引导人维持和繁殖他的种族，后者规定自然的激情必须得到限制和调整的方式。3. 父母与孩子的关系；这种关系是婚姻关系的结果，是它主要的目的和意图：通过这种关系的美德，孩童得到保护，维持和教育。但是，既然这种照料主要依赖的父母可能由于死亡或其它的方式在他们完成其责任之前而丧失，所以法律规定了第四种关系；4. 监护人与受监护人的关系；这是一种人为的亲子关系，无论什么时候由于自然的原因，它可以为孩子提供保障。下面依次论述所有这些关系。

WIND

IN discussing the relation of master and servant, I shall, first, consider the several sorts of servants, and how this relation is created and destroyed: secondly, the effects of this relation with regard to the parties themselves: and, lastly, its effect with regard to other persons.
在讨论雇主与雇员的关系中，我将首先考虑雇员的几种形式，以及这种关系如何建立和终止：第二，这种关系对当事双方的影响：最后，这种关系对其他人的影响。

I. As to the several sorts of servants: I have formerly observed1 that pure and proper slavery does not, nay cannot, subsist in England; such I mean, whereby an absolute and unlimited power is given to the master over the life and fortune of the slave. And indeed it is repugnant to reason, and the principles of natural law, that such a state should subsist any where. The three origins of the right of slavery assigned by Justinian,2 are all of them built upon false foundation. As, first, slavery is held to arise "jure gentium" ["by the law of nations"] from a state of captivity in war; whence slaves are called mancipia, quasi manu capti [mancipia, as taken by hand]. The conqueror, say the civilians, had a right to the life of his captive; and, having spared that, has a right to deal with him as he pleases. But it is an untrue position, a man may kill his enemy: he has only a right to kill him, in particular cases; in cases of absolute necessity, for self-defense; and it is plain this absolute necessity did not subsist, since the victor did not actually kill him, but made him prisoner. War is itself justifiable only on principles of self-preservation; and therefore it gives no other right over prisoners, but merely to disable them from doing harm to us, by confining their persons: much less can it give a right to kill, torture, abuse, plunder, or even to enslave, an enemy, when the war is over. Since therefore the right of making slaves by captivity, depends on a supposed right of slaughter, that foundation failing, the consequence drawn from it must fail likewise. But, secondly, it is said that slavery may begin "jure civili" ["by civil law"]; when one man sells himself to another. This, if only meant of contracts to serve or work for another, is very just: but when applied to strict slavery, in the sense of the laws of old Rome or modern Barbary, is also impossible. Every sale implies a price, a quid pro quo [value for value], an equivalent given to the seller what he transfers to the buyer: but what equivalent can be given for life, and liberty, both of which (in absolute slavery) are held to be in the master's disposal? His property also, the very price he seems to receive, devolves ipso facto to his master, the instant he becomes his slave. In this case therefore the buyer gives nothing, and the seller receives nothing: of what validity then can a sale be, which destroys the very principles upon which all sales are founded? lastly, we are told, that besides these two ways by which slaves "siunt," or are acquired, they may also be hereditary: "servi nascuntur;" the children of acquired slaves are, jure naturae [by the law of nature], by a negative king of birthright, slaves also. But this being built on the two former rights must fall together with them. If neither captivity, nor the sale of oneself, can by the law of nature and reason, reduce the parent to slavery, much less can it reduce the offspring.
I. 至于说到雇员的几种形式：我之前已经说过，纯粹的完全的奴役制度在英格兰没有也不能存在；我这样说的意思是，据此将给与主人对奴隶的生命和命运一种绝对和不受限制的权力。实际上这种奴役状态存在于任何地方都是与理性和自然法的原则相违背的。查士丁尼大帝对奴役权利的三种来源的解释，均建立在错误的基础之上。比如他说，第一，根据国际法（law of nations）奴役产生于战争中的囚禁状态；由此奴隶被称为“mancipia”（意即用手俘获的人）。罗马法学家（civilian）说，征服者对他的俘虏的生命便拥有了一种权利；若让其幸存下来，便拥有了一种依其意愿处置俘虏的权利。但是这是一种不符事实的观点，一个人可以杀死他的敌人；他仅仅在特定的情境之下才有权利杀死他的敌人；在这种情境之中，出于自我防御的绝对必要性；并且很明显，既然胜利者实际上并未杀他而将其变成了被囚禁者，那么这种绝对必要性就不再存在了；所以，对于被囚禁者，并未给与其它的权利，而仅仅给与了通过限制他们的人身而使其丧失伤害我们的能力的权利：当战争结束的时候，就更不可能给与杀死，折磨，虐待，抢劫，或即使是奴役敌人的权利了。所以，既然通过囚禁而制造奴隶的权利，依赖于一种假定的屠杀的权利，那么只要这个基础错误，从这个基础推导出来的结论也同样的错误。不过他又给出了第二种来源，奴役可以通过世俗法律开始；当一个人将自己出卖给他人的时候。这，如果仅仅意味着为另一个人服务或工作的契约，是非常正当的：但是当应用于古罗马或现代巴伯瑞（Barbary，北非除埃及外的伊斯兰教国家，是过去地中海海盗的主要据点）法律上的严格意义的奴役的时候，也是不可能的。每种出卖都意味着一个价格，“价值对价值”（value for value），对于转移给买者的东西，相应的要支付一等价物给卖者：但是在绝对奴役中生命和自由均交由主人来处置，什么样的等价物可以用来购买生命和自由？在他沦为奴隶的那一刻，他的财产，即他接受的价格，也一并转交给他的主人。所以，在这种情况下，买者什么也不用支付：那么这种出卖又有什么意义呢？它破坏了所有出卖的基础原则。最后，他告诉我们，除了以上两种获取奴隶的途径外，奴隶也可以继承：根据自然的法律，奴隶的孩子也是奴隶。但是这建于前两种权利之上，当与它们一同坍塌。依据自然和理性的法律，如果囚禁和出卖自己都不能让父母沦为奴隶，他们的后代就更不可能沦为奴隶了。

WIND

UPON these principles the law of England abhors, and will not endure the existence of, slavery within this nation: so that when an attempt was made to introduce it, by statute 1 Edw. VI. c. 3. which ordained, that all idle vagabonds should be made slaves, and fed upon bread, water, or small drink, and refuse meat; should wear a ring of iron round their necks, arms, or legs; and should be compelled by beating, chaining, or otherwise, to perform the work assigned them, were it never so vile; the spirit of the nation could not brook this condition, even in the most abandoned rogues; and therefore this statute was repealed in two years afterwards.3 And now it is laid down,4 that a slave or negro, the instant he lands in England, becomes a freeman; that is, the law will protect him in the enjoyment of his person, his liberty, and his property. Yet, with regard to any right which the master may have acquired, by contract or the like, to the perpetual service of John or Thomas, this will remain exactly in the same state as before: for this is no more than the same state of subjection for life, which every apprentice submits so for the space of seven years, or sometimes for a longer term. Hence too it follows, that the infamous and unchristian practice of withholding baptism from negro servants, lest they should thereby gain their liberty, is totally without foundation, as well as without excuse. The law of England acts upon general and extensive principles: it gives liberty, rightly understood, that is, protection, to a Jew, a Turk, or a heathen, as well as to those who profess the true religion of Christ; and it will not dissolve a civil contract, either express or implied, between master and servant, on account of the alteration of faith in either of the contracting parties: but the slave is entitled to the same liberty in England before, as after, baptism; and, whatever service the heathen negro owed to his English master, the same is he bound to render when a Christian.

基于这些原则，英格兰的法律憎恨，并且不会容忍奴役制度在这个国家存在：所以，当通过爱德华六世第1年法案第3章意图引入奴役的时候，它规定，即所有闲散的流浪者应当变为奴隶，仅提供面包和水，或少量的饮料，不提供肉食；应当在脖子上，手臂或腿上套一个铁圈；可以通过鞭打，镣铐或其它的方式强迫其完成指定的工作，这不认为是什么恶劣的事情；我们国家的精神不能容忍这种情况，即使是针对最自甘堕落的无赖（rogue）；所以这部法案两年之后便废除了。现在，法律已经确立了这样一条原则，即一个奴隶或黑人，在他踏上英格兰土地的那一刻，便成为一个自由人；换句话说，法律将保护他享受他的生命，他的自由和他的财产。不过，对于那些主人通过契约或类似的东西已经获得的约翰或托马斯的终身服务的权利，这将维持之前的状态：因为这种对生命的支配状态只不过与每个学徒（apprentice）所服从的七年或某些时候更长一段时间的服务相同。同样，阻止黑人仆人接受洗礼以免他们因此获得他们的自由，被认为是一种可耻和非基督徒的行为，也是完全没有理由和基础的。英格兰法律在一般和广泛的原则上来说：它给与自由，正确的理解的话，即，对犹太人，土耳其人，或异教徒（犹太教，基督教和伊斯兰教之外的信仰者）的保护，与对那些表示真正的基督信仰的人的保护是一样的；在主人与仆人之间，由于订立契约的任何一方的信仰的改变，法律都不明确表达或默示可以解除世俗的契约：而是在英格兰一个奴隶在洗礼之前或之后均有同样的自由；无论一个异教徒黑人对他的英格兰主人负有什么样的服务，当成为基督徒时他仍然应当履行。

WIND

爱德华六世（1537—1553),一个孩童国王.

WIND

1. THE first sort of servants therefore, acknowledged by the laws of England, are menial servants; so called from being intra moenia [within the walls], or domestics. The contract between them and their masters arises upon the hiring. If the hiring be general without any particular time limited, the law construes it to be a hiring for a year;5 upon a principle of natural equity, that the servant shall serve, and the master maintain him, throughout all the revolutions of the respective seasons; as well when there is work to be done, as when there is not:6 but the contract may be made for any larger or smaller term. All single men between twelve years old and sixty, and married ones under thirty years of age, and all single women between twelve and forty, not having any visible livelihood, are compellable by two justices to go out to service, for the promotion of honest industry: and no master can put away his servant, or servant leave his master, either before or at the end of his term, without a quarter's warning; unless upon reasonable cause to be allowed by a justice of the peace:7 but they may part by consent, or make a special bargain.

1. 所以，英格兰法律承认的第一种仆人是“家庭仆人”；这种称呼来源于“围墙之内”（intra moenia：within the walls），或者家庭之内。一旦雇用，他们之间的契约和主人便产生了。如果雇用没有特定的时间限制，一般的法律默认为一年；基于自然平等的原则，在整个四季更替的过程中，无论有没有工作，仆人都应当听众主人的吩咐，而主人也应当供养他：不过这种契约可以长于或短于一年。所有12岁至60岁的单身男人，30岁以下结婚的男人，所有12岁至40岁的单身女人，若没有任何明显的谋生的手段，将被两名法官强制外出服务，以促进诚实劳动：在契约开始前或将要结束的时候，若没有提前一个季度告知对方，主人不能将他的仆人置之不顾，仆人也不能离开他的主人；除非基于合理的理由得到和平法官的允许：不过他们可以基于同意或通过特别的协议解除原来的契约关系。

WIND

2. ANOTHER species of servants are called apprentices (from apprendre, to learn) and are usually bound for a term of years, by deed indented or indentures, to serve their masters, and be maintained and instructed by them: for which purpose our statute law8 has made minors capable of binding themselves. This is usually done to persons of trade, in order to learn their art and mystery; and sometimes very large sums are given with them, as a premium for such their instruction: but it may be done to husbandmen, nay to gentlemen, and others. And9 children of poor persons may be apprenticed out by the overseers, with consent of two justices, till twenty-four years of age, to such persons as are thought fitting; who are also compellable to take them: and it is held, that gentlemen of fortune, and clergymen, are equally liable with others to such compulsion.10 Apprentices to trades may be discharged on reasonable cause, either at request of themselves or masters, at the quarter sessions, or by one justice, with appeal to the sessions:11 who may, by the equity of the stature, if they think it reasonable, direct restitution of a ratable share of the money given with the apprentice. And parish apprentices may be discharged in the same manner, by two justices.

2. 另外一种仆人，被称为“学徒”（apprentice），通常通过双联契约（indenture，师徒各执一联，中间锯齿分开，以辨真伪）服务与他们的主人一定的年限，相应的由主人供养和教导：为此目的我们的法律将未成年人视为有能力为他们自己订立这种契约的人。通常这种人身交易，是为了习得他们的技艺和秘方；有时为了得到这样的教导还须支付一大笔额外费用给雇主：不过这种情况雇主可能是农艺人，不是富绅和其他的人。穷人的孩子可由济贫官（overseer），在得到两名法官的同意下，交给认为合适的人——而这些人被强制必须接纳他们——做学徒，直到24岁：法律规定，富绅和神职人员，和其他人有同样的可能性接受这样的强制。这种师徒交易可以由学徒或师傅基于合理理由的请求，在季审法庭（quarter session，一个季度一个庭期的法庭）上予以解除，或者申诉至法庭由一名法官解除：基于平等的原则，如果法官认为合理，他们可以命令归还恰当比例的学徒费用。教区学徒可以依同样的方式通过两名法官解除关系。

WIND

狄更斯的《Oliver Twist》（雾都孤儿），奥利弗的几次扶养关系的转移便是这种情况。

WIND

3. A THIRD species of servants are laborers, who are only hired by the day or the week, and do not live intra moenia, as part of the family; concerning whom the statute so often cited14 has made many very good regulations; 1. Directing that all persons who have no visible effects may be compelled to work: 2. Defining how long they must continue at work in summer and winter: 3. Punishing such as leave or desert their work: 4. Empowering the justices at sessions, or the sheriff of the county, to settle their wages: and 5. Inflicting penalties on such as either give, or exact, more wages than are so settled.

3. 第三种仆人是劳工，他们仅仅以日或周计被雇用，并且不作为家庭的一员；与之相关的是那条经常被引用的法案（伊丽莎白第5年法案第4章），制定了许多非常好的规则；1. 指示没有明显的动产的人必须强制工作：2. 详细说明他们在夏天和冬天必须连续工作多长时间：3. 对逃离工作的人进行惩罚：4. 授权法庭的法官或郡长确定他们的薪水：5. 对给与或索取比确定薪水更多的人施加惩罚。

WIND

从这一条，以及通过斯密的《国家财富论》，我认为在英国，现代制造工厂的雏形的形成时间在18世纪后期。工业史以及相关的法律史，要寻找其它的著作了。

WIND

4. THERE is yet a fourth species of servants, if they may be so called being rather in a superior, a ministerial, capacity; such as stewards, factors, and bailiffs: whom however the law considers as servants pro tempore, with regard to such of their acts, as affect their master's or employer's property. Which leads me to consider,

4. 还有第四种仆人，如果他们可以这样称呼的话，他们颇具地位和能力；比如管家，代理人，财产管理人：然而从他们的行为影响他们的主人或雇主的财产而言，法律将他们视为“临时雇员”（servant pro tempore）。接下来继续考虑，

WIND

II. THE manner in which this relation, of service, affects either the master or servant. And, first, by hiring and service for a year, or apprenticeship under indentures, a person gains a settlement in that parish wherein he last served forty days.15 In the next place persons serving as apprentices to any trade have an exclusive right to exercise that trade in any part of England.16 This law, with regard to the exclusive part of it, has by turns been looked upon as a hard law, or as a beneficial one, according to the prevailing humor of the times: which has occasioned a great variety of resolutions in the courts of law concerning it; and attempts have been frequently made for its repeal, though hitherto without success. At common law every man might use what trade he pleased; but this statute restrains that liberty to such as have served as apprentices: the adversaries to which provision say, that all restrictions (which tend to introduce monopolies) are pernicious to trade; the advocates for it allege, that unskillfulness in trades is equally detrimental to the public, as monopolies. This reason indeed only extends to such trades, in the exercise whereof skill is required: but another of their arguments goes much farther; viz. that apprenticeships are useful to the commonwealth, by employing of youth, and learning them to be early industrious; but that no one would be induced to undergo a seven years servitude, if others, though equally skillful, were allowed the same advantages without having undergone the same discipline: and in this there seems to be much reason. However, the resolutions of the courts have in general rather confined than extended the restriction. No trades are held to be within the statute, but such as were in being at the making of it:17 for trading in a country village, apprenticeships are not requisite:18 and following the trade seven years is sufficient without any binding; for the statute only says the person must serve as an apprentice, and does not require an actual apprenticeship to have existed.

II. 这种服务的关系对主人或仆人影响的方式。首先，通过一年的雇用服务，或者在双联契约之下的学徒关系，一个人将可以在最近服务满40天的教区内定居。其次，以学徒身份服务的人，将可在英格兰任何地方获得从事此种行业的排他性权利。这种赋予学徒排他性权利的法律，随着时间的推移，流行的观点有时认为是一条难以实行的法律，有时又认为是一条有益的法律：这导致了法庭与之相关的判决大相径庭；废除它的努力也经常发生，虽然至今还未成功。在共同法中每个人都可以选择他喜欢的行业；但是这条法律却将这种自由仅限于那些做过学徒的人：这条规定的反对者说，所有的限制（它趋向于引入垄断）对行业都是有害的；而主张者宣称，各行各业中技能的缺乏同垄断一样对公众有害。这种理由实际上仅仅延及那些需要技能的行业：不过他们争论的另一条理由则要广泛得多；即，通过雇用年轻人，让他们懂得及早的勤勉工作，这样的学徒制度对共同体是有用的；如果其他未经同样训练的人，只要具备同样的技能，便被允许享有同样的利益，那么将没有人会被吸引去忍受七年的苦役：这种解释看起来要有理得多。然而，法庭的判决一般的会缩小而不是扩大限制。除了在制定法律的时候明确包含的行业，其他行业并不受这条法律约束：在乡村中从事这些行业，学徒也不是必备条件：而且，进入行业七年便已足够，无须其它任何条件；因为这部法案仅仅说一个人必须以学徒身份服务七年，并未要求实际上要做七年学徒。

WIND

A MASTER may by law correct his apprentice or servant for negligence or other misbehavior, so it be done with moderation:20 though, if the master's wife beats him, it is good cause of departure.21 But if any servant, workman, or laborer assaults his master or dame, he shall suffer one year's imprisonment, and other open corporal punishment, not extending to life or limb.
师傅必须依法纠正他的学徒或仆人的疏忽或其他错误的行为，这样做的时候当适度：虽然，如果师傅的妻子殴打学徒，这可以成为解除师徒关系的好的理由。但是如果任何仆人，工人或劳工攻击他的主人或主人的妻子，他将遭受一年的监禁和其它公开的肉体惩罚，不过不能剥夺生命或伤及肢体。

BY service all servants and laborers, except apprentices, become entitled to wages: according to their agreement, if menial servants: or according to the appointment of the sheriff or sessions, if laborers or servants in husbandry: for the statutes for regulation of wages extend to such servants only;23 it being impossible for any magistrate to be a judge of the employment of menial servants, or of course to assess their wages.
通过服务，除学徒外所有的仆人和劳工，应当获得薪水：家庭仆人根据他们之间的协商：农业中的劳工或仆人则由郡长或法庭指定：因为调整薪水的法案仅仅延及农业中的雇员；任何管理者将不可能对家庭仆人的雇用充当法官，当然也就不能确定他们的薪水了。

WIND

III. LET us, lastly, see how strangers may be affected by this relation of master and servant: or how a master may behave towards others on behalf of his servant; and what a servant may do on behalf of his master.
III. 最后，让我们看一看这种主仆关系如何影响其他的人：或者说，主人代表他仆人的利益如何与其他人打交道；以及仆人代表他主人的利益可以做什么。

AND, first, the master may maintain, that is, abet and assist his servant in any action at law against a stranger: whereas, in general, it is an offense against public justice to encourage suits and animosities, by helping to bear the expense of them, and is called in law maintenance.24 A master also may bring an action against any man for beating or maiming his servant; but in such case he must assign, as a special reason for so doing, his own damage by the loss of his service; and this loss must be proved upon the trial.25 A master likewise may justify an assault in defense of his servant, and a servant in defense of his master:26 the master, because he has an interest in his servant, not to be deprived of his service; the servant, because it is part of his duty, for which he receives his wages, to stand by and defend his master.27 Also if any person do hire or retain my servant, being in my service, for which the servant departs from me and goes to serve the other, I may have an action for damages against both the new master and the servant, or either of them: but if the new master did not know that he is may servant, no action lies; unless he afterwards refuse to restore him upon information and demand.28 The reason and foundation upon which all this doctrine is built, seem to be the property that every man has in the service of his domestics; acquired by the contract of hiring, and purchased by giving them wages.
首先，主人可以维护，即支持和协助他的仆人在任何法律诉讼中反对其他人：尽管一般而言，通过承担费用鼓励这种诉讼和敌意会冒犯公共正义，在法律上称之为“维护”（maintenance）。（此句话的意思是：主人的这种行为虽然可能会与公共正义相冲突，然而这却是合法的行为）主人也可以因殴打或伤残他的仆人而起诉任何人；不过在这种案件中他必须说明因丧失仆人的服务而所受的损失，以此作为起诉的特别理由；而且这种损失必须在法庭予以证明。同样的，主人必须证明为保护他的仆人所作的攻击为正当，仆人亦必须证明为保护他的主人所作的攻击为正当：对主人而言，因为他可以从仆人那里获益，不应剥夺他应得的服务；对仆人而言，因为支持和保护主人是他的责任，他因此而获得薪水。另外，如果任何人雇用或保留仍在为我服务的仆人，此仆人因此而离开我并去服务于他人，我可以因损失而起诉我的仆人和他的新主人，或者他们中的任何一个：但是如果新主人并不知晓他是我的仆人，便不可起诉他；除非之后他得知且在我的要求之下仍然拒绝归还我的仆人。这个理由和此种学说所建立的全部基础，看起来就是每个人对他的家庭仆人的服务所拥有的财产权；通过雇用契约获得，通过支付薪水而购买。

WIND

AS for those things which a servant may do on behalf of his master, they seem all to proceed upon this principle, that the master is answerable for the act of his servant, if done by his command, either expressly given, or implied: nam qui facit per alium, facit per se [he who acts by an agent, does it himself].29 Therefore, if the servant commit a trespass by the command or encouragement of his master, the master shall be guilty of it: not that the servant is excused, for he is only to obey his master in matters that are honest and lawful. If an innkeeper's servants rob his guests, the master is bound to restitutions:30 for as there is a confidence reposed in him, that he will take care to provide honest servants, his negligence is a kind of implied consent to the robbery; nam, qui non prohibet, cum prohibere possit, jubet [he who does not forbid a crime while he may, sanctions it]. So likewise if the drawer at a tavern sells a man bad wine, whereby his health is injured, he may bring an action against the master:31 for, although the master did not expressly order the servant to sell it to that person in particular, yet his permitting him to draw and sell it at all is impliedly a general command.

就一个仆人可以代表他的主人所作的那些事情而言，它们看起来均是基于如下原则，即如果仆人依主人的命令——无论是明确给与还是默示——行事，主人对他的仆人的行为负责：“他通过代理所行的事，便是他所行的。”（he who acts by an agent, does it himself）所以，如果仆人受他主人的命令或鼓励而实施了侵害，主人便对此有罪：当然仆人并不能因此而被宽恕，因为他只能在那些诚实和合法的事务中才须服从他的主人。如果旅馆的仆人抢劫了他的客人，老板应当归还：因为既然老板被寄以信任，他便当谨慎的提供诚实的仆人，他的疏忽是对抢劫的一种默认同意；“他在可以禁止罪行的时候不禁止，便是允许。”（he who does not forbid a crime while he may, sanctions it）所以同样的，如果酒馆的侍者卖劣质酒给一个人，他的健康因此而受到伤害，他可以起诉酒馆老板：因为，虽然老板没有特别的明确命令仆人卖这样的酒给那个人，然而，他允许他的仆人倒酒卖，被认为是一种默认的一般命令（general command）。

WIND

IN the same manner, whatever a servant is permitted to do in the usual course of his business, is equivalent to a general command. If I pay money to a banker's servant, the banker is answerable for it: if I pay it to a clergyman's or a physician's servant, whose usual business it is not to receive money for his master, and he embezzles it, I must pay it over again. If a steward lets a lease of a farm, without the owner's knowledge, the owner must stand to the bargain; for this is the steward's business. A wife, a friend, a relation, that use to transact business for a man, are quoad hoc his servants; and the principal must answer for their conduct: for the law implies, that they act under a general command; and, without such a doctrine as this, no mutual intercourse between man and man could subsist with any tolerable convenience. If I usually deal with a tradesman by myself, or constantly pay him ready money, I am not answerable for what my servant takes up upon trust; for here is no implied order to the tradesman to trust my servant: but if I usually send him upon trust, or sometimes on trust, and sometimes with ready money, I am answerable for all he takes up; for the tradesman cannot possibly distinguish when he comes by my order, and when upon his own authority.

同样的方式，凡是一个仆人在他的通常事务中被允许做什么，便等价于一种一般命令。如果我将钱付给银行的雇员，银行老板须对此负责：如果我将钱付给一个神职人员或医师的仆人，他们通常的事务不是为他们的主人接受钱币，如果他据为己有，我必须再次支付。如果未经农场所有者的同意，其管家出租之，所有者必须支持此契约，因为这是管家的事务。一个人的妻子，朋友或亲人为他去从事交易，是作为仆人的目的来使用的；主人必须为他们的行为负责：因为法律默认为他们是依一种一般的命令而行事；而且，如果没有这样一种学说，人与人之间的相互交往便不能以任何可忍受的便利程度而存在。如果我通常都是亲自与某个行业工人做生意，或者恒定不变的亲自支付现金，那么我无须因他人对我的信任而为我的仆人所做的事情负责；因为这种情况并不默示为命令别人来信任我的仆人：但是，如果我通常基于信任而派遣我的仆人，或者有时派遣他，有时又亲自支付现金，那么，我应当为我的仆人所做的一切负责；因为这个行业工人不可能分辨什么时候依我的命令，什么时候又是依我的仆人的意志。

WIND

IF a servant, lastly, by his negligence does any damage to a stranger, the master shall answer for his neglect: if a smith's servant lames a horse while he is shoeing him, an action lies against the master, and not against the servant. But in these cases the damage must be done, while he is actually employed in the master's service; otherwise the servant shall answer for his own misbehavior. Upon this principle, by the common law,33 if a servant kept his master's fire negligently, so that his neighbor's house was burned down thereby, an action lay against the master; because this negligence happened in his service: otherwise, if the servant, going along the street with a torch, by negligence sets fire to a house; for there he is not in his master's immediate service, and must himself answer the damage personally. But now the common law is, in the former case, altered by statute 6 Ann. c. 3. which ordains that no action shall be maintained against any, in whose house or chamber any fire shall accidentally being; for their own loss is sufficient punishment for their own or their servants' carelessness. But if such fine happens through the negligence of any servant (whose loss is commonly very little) such servant shall forfeit 100 £, to be distributed among the sufferers; and, in default of payment, shall be committed to some workhouse and there kept to hard labor for eighteen months.34 A master is, lastly, chargeable if any of his family lays or casts anything out of his house into the street or common highway, to the damage of any individual, or the common nuisance of his majesty's liege people:35 for the master has the superintendence and charge of all his household. And this also agrees with the civil law;36 which holds, that the pater familias [family father], in this and similar cases, "ob alterius culpam tenetur, sive servi, sive liberi" ["is held accountable for the fault of another, whether his servant, or child"].

最后，由于仆人的亵职而对他人造成了损失，主人应当为自己的疏忽而负责：如果铁匠的仆人在钉马蹄的时候弄跛了它，便可起诉主人而不是仆人。但是在这些情况下造成损失的时候，仆人须实际上是在为主人服务；否则仆人应当为他自己的过错负责。共同法基于以上原则，如果仆人在照料火烛的时候由于亵职，邻人的房屋因此而遭焚毁，便可起诉主人；因为这种亵职发生在他的服务之中：否则，如果仆人举着火把沿街行走，因疏忽而烧着了房屋；由于这并不是在为主人的服务当中，因此他必须亲自为此损失负责。但是现在在前一种情况中，共同法已经由安妮（1665-1714）第6年法案第3章予以改变，它规定在房屋或会堂中若意外起火，则不可起诉任何人；因为他们自己的损失已足以惩罚他们自己或其仆人的粗心了。但是如果发生这种情况纯粹是由于仆人的亵职（他自己的损失通常很小），这样的仆人应当被罚100英镑，以分给遭受损失的人；若不能付款，当送往工厂并从事艰苦劳动18个月。最后，如果任何主人的家人将任何东西放于或掷于街道或共有路上，对于任何个人所受的损害，或国王臣民所受的共同妨碍，可以因此而起诉主人：因为主人对他的家人拥有监督和管理的责任。这和查士丁尼法律是一致的；它规定在这种和类似的情况下，家庭的父亲应当对其他人的过错承担责任，不管是他的仆人，或者孩子。

WIND

WE may observe, that in all the cases here put, the master may be frequently a loser by the trust reposed in his servant, but never can be a gainer: he may frequently be answerable for his servant's misbehavior, but never can shelter himself from punishment by laying the blame on his agent. The reason of this is still uniform and the same; that the wrong done by the servant is looked upon in law as the wrong of the master himself; and it is a standing maxim, that no man shall be allowed to make any advantage of his own wrong.

我们可以看到，在此所举的所有案件中，主人常常因他人对他仆人的信任而可能成为损失者，但从来不能成为得利者：他可能常常须对他仆人的过错承担责任，但从来不能通过谴责他的代理人而免除惩罚。此种理由是一致的；即仆人所犯的过错在法律上被视为主人自己的过错；这是一条恒定的格言，即“不能允许任何人从他的过错中获得任何益处”。

WIND

END.

psyzjs

WIND应多读些拉丁文和古希腊文，未来的成就不可限量！