Bava Basra 5:8 - 5:9

עד של נתמלאה המדה – it (i.e., the Mishnah) is speaking about the measure [of a middleman] that is not either of theirs, and the lender lent to both of them, it is borrowed by the seller; therefore, before the measure was filled up, the utensil is lent to the seller, and the burying did not acquire it. Once the measure was filled up, the utensil is lent to the buyer; the buyer has acquired it, for he has acquired it. And we are speaking of a market-stand underneath a colonnade or in the domain of the purchaser.

היה סרסור ביניהם ונשברה החבית – the utensil was his (i.e., the agent’s/middleman’s).

נשברה לסרסור – and we don’t say that he is the agent of the purchaser and it was broken by the purchaser.

וחייב להטיף לו ג' טפין – the seller to the purchaser from the what cleaved to the walls of the measure after he had emptied out the wine or the oil.

הרכינה ומיצת – he turned it the measure over on its side after he emptied the oil or the wine and let it drip three drops and what was drained of the measure was gathered at the rim of the utensil to one place, and they belong to the seller, for the purchaser had despaired of it.

והחנוני אינו חייב להטיף ג' טפין – because he is preoccupied that he is selling every hour.

ר' יהודה אומר – they did not say that the storekeeper is exempt from letting three drops drip out, but rather, it was the Eve of the Sabbath near dusk. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.

השולח בנו – minor [child] with the storekeeper and in his hand was a Duponium/a Roman coin equal to two Asses which are two Issarim to bring to him an Issar of oil. And he will give him another Issar. And this is what he did. But the young child broke the flask and the oil spilled and he lost the Issar that the storekeeper gave him. The storekeeper is liable for oil, and for the flask and for the Issar, for the father did not send his minor-age child to the storekeeper other than to inform him that he needs oil, not that he should send the oil through his (i.e., the child’s) hand. And in the Gemara (Tractate Bava Batra 87b-88a), it raises the question: why is the storekeeper liable for the flask? It is a loss with consent. For he himself (i.e., the father) sent it in the hand of his son, and [the Gemara] answers for example that the storekeeper took it to measure oil for others. Therefore, he became a thief concerning it. And it exists in his domain until he returns it to the mater. And even though he returned it to the young child, he is not exempt from it.

רבי יהודה פוטר שעל מנת כן שלחו – for just as the storekeeper sent it in the hand of his son

שהוא פטןר – from the cost of the flask, but the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.