I do not understand why persons who conceal property which has been thrown upon the shore by the wreck of a ship should seem to have committed a crime deserving the penalty of death. Anyone who cheats people out of their property, and thereby deprives those who are deserving of the pity of others of the means of subsistence, and the only consolation which they have, when, on the other hand, he should endeavor to aid them in the unfortunate condition to which they are reduced by the loss of their possessions, is guilty of an offence of no little atrocity, and this, indeed, is clearer than light. But I am unwilling for those whose foolish cupidity has impelled to commit this crime to be put to death, as how can what they have taken be compared in importance with the life which they are condemned to lose? He who attempts to profit by an act of this kind must certainly be an extremely wicked and sacrilegious person, like one who despoils the dead, which is sometimes done. Still, his crime does not deserve such severe punishment, for it is not just to deprive him of his immortal soul, by way of retribution for the removal of something that is material and easily destroyed. For if, even with reference to material things, the penalty should not be greater in value than the injury, why should he who conceals property belonging to persons who are shipwrecked be subjected to punishment so out of proportion to his crime that words are lacking to express it? Therefore, We order that, for the future, this penalty shall not be imposed, but that he who conceals property under such circumstances shall be condemned to pay fourfold the value of what he appropriated.