Bava Metzia 34: Unpaid Bailees and Collection of Monies from Theives

Daf 33 ends with a new Mishna in Perek III.  Daf 34 continues that conversation.

Our Mishna teaches that an unpaid bailee may agree to watch someone's property with or without signing an oath and without a fee.  If that item is lost or stolen, the unpaid bailee can take an oath and forego responsibility for the item.  Instead of taking an oath, the unpaid bailee might pay money.  The thief of such an item, if found, pays either double or the four or fivefold payment (if the item stolen was an animal that was stolen or slaughtered).  That payment is given to the bailee if the bailee held the deposit on the item.  If not, that payment is given to the owner of the item.  We see that this could cause unpaid bailees to wish to change their minds so that they might receive double payment for the item that was lost or stolen.

The rabbis argue that it may not be possible to transfer ownership based on an item that does not yet exist - for example, on the fruits of a date palm.  Or, perhaps, the theft has not yet happened and the bailee has not yet decided against about holding the deposit.  And they also discuss what should be done when a person says that he will pay but has not yet paid; when a borrower says that has paid for an item that is stolen.  Are we encouraging people to change their minds about their status in order to collect a double payment?  And to whom do found thieves pay their fines?  

Our daf ends with discussions about loans.  The rabbis walk us through who might take oaths and how this could change their payments.