Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Choshen Mishpat/308
Paragraph 1- If one rents an animal for a man to ride on, a woman may not ride on it. The same is true with respect to an idolater. There are those who say, however, that this is only in the first instance. If he violated the law, however, and had a woman ride on it, even if the animal was damaged he would not be required to pay. There are those who disagree. Everyone agrees that if the local custom was to pay more for women riding, he must add to the rent as is the custom. If he rented to have a woman ride, a man may ride on it.
Paragraph 2- If one rented to have a woman ride on it, any woman may ride on it, whether she is big or small, even if she is pregnant or nursing.
Paragraph 1- If one rents a donkey to ride on it, he may place his clothing, his jug and the food needed for the road on the animal because it is not the practice of the renter to search at each hotel to purchase food. The owner of the donkey may object to any more than this. Similarly, the donkey-owner can place barley, straw and food needed for that day. The renter may object to any more than that because the owner can purchase at each hotel. Thus, if there is nowhere to purchase from, he may place his food and the animal’s food that is needed for the entire way. This is all where one rents without specifying in a place with no known custom. If it is a place that has a custom, everyone would follow the custom.
Paragraph 4- If one rents an animal to bring 200 litre of wheat and he brought 200 litre of barley and the animal died, the renter would be liable because the volume makes a more difficult load and barley has volume. The same applies where he rented to bring grain and he brought that weight of straw. If he rented to bring barley and he brought that weight of wheat and the animal died, however, he would be exempt. The same applies to anything similar.
Paragraph 4- If one rents an animal to carry a known weight and he added to the load 1/30 over what they agreed on and the animal died, he would be liable. If it was less than 1/30 he would be exempt but he must pay for the added amount. See later 335:1.
Paragraph 6- If one rented without specifying, he can only load the known weight in that that location for that animal. If he added 1/30, such as where the practice was to load 30 and he loaded 31, and the animal died or broke, he would be liable.
Paragraph 7- If one loaded an extra kav of load on a porter and he was damaged, the owner would be liable for the damage because although the porter is a sane person who can feel how heavy the load is, he assumed it felt heavy because he was sick. If one takes another’s donkey without his knowledge and works with it with the intention to pay the owner, he has the status of a borrower without permission and is a thief. If the donkey is intended to be rented out, he is not a thief, but if the owner’s household objected and said the owner needs the donkey, it is like he borrowed without permission and is a thief. If he took the donkey to rescue what belongs to him and he wants to pay the owner for his loss, he is not a thief because that is a court-condition, as mentioned above in 264:5. See later 363:5 with respect to these laws.