Adsum

March 2005

The Precious Five-Dollar Bill

More Answers to Today's Moral Problems
by Very Rev. Francis J. Connell, C.SS.R., S.T.D., L.L.D., L.H.D.

Question: A clerk stole a five-dollar bill from the desk of his wealthy employer and spent it. Afterward he discovered that the bill was a rare collector's item, worth more than a thousand dollars. What was the gravity of the clerk's sin of theft, and what is to be said of his obligation to make restitution?

Answer: Objectively the clerk committed a grave sin, since a thousand dollars greatly exceeds the absolute sum for serious matter, however rich his employer may be. If he was in invincible ignorance of the extraordinary value of this particular piece of currency and believed he was committing a sin of injustice only to the extent of five dollars, the theft was subjectively venial, since the employer is described as a wealthy man. If, when he discovers the special value of the bill there is no longer any reasonable hope of recovering it, he satisfies his obligation of restitution (binding sub levi) by restoring five dollars to his employer, since he disposed of the money in good faith, as regards its special worth, and has become no richer from this standpoint.

However, if there is a chance that he can get back the original five-dollar bill (for example, from the store where he spent it shortly before he found out its great value) he is bound to make this effort; and this obligation binds sub grave (under pain of serious sin), and according to the common teaching as a duty of justice. Hence, if he neglects to make this attempt when the recovery of the bill could be hoped for, and later it becomes impossible to locate it, he would be bound to restore the full value of the currency — that is, a thousand dollars, or at least an amount proportionate to the hope he had of recovering the bill. However, there would be no obligation to make a search or later to make full restitution if the attempt to find the money would be likely to be gravely detrimental to him (for example, if it might lead to a lengthy prison term). On the other hand, if the employer finds out that the clerk was the thief, he could lawfully bring suit against him for the entire amount, even though the clerk disposed of the money in good faith as regards its special value and could not later recover it. And, if the verdict of the court requires restitution of the full value of the bill, the thief would be bound in conscience to pay it.

Back to March 2005 Newsletter
Back to top

Printed copies of Adsum, a publication by the seminarians of Mater Dei Seminary for the reading enjoyment of friends and benefactors, are sent free of charge to all who request it. Most issues also contain photos of recent events involving the seminarians. If you would like to put on this mailing list, please use this form.