Exodus 22:1 says, If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.  Stealing and killing or selling an ox or a sheep brought a severe penalty.  Oxen were to be repaid at five for one and sheep at four for one.  If we had the same penalties today, we might cut down on theft.  Verse two states, If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him. There was a defend your home law even then.  If a thief was accidently killed while breaking in, the one who killed him was not to be held accountable for the thief's death.  Verse three says, If the sun be risen upon him, there shall be blood shed for him; for he should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.  Matthew Henry says this refers to the person in verse one who had stolen the ox or sheep.  If they were able to make restitution the next day, they were to do so, and if they couldn't they were to be sold to pay the debt.  This was still probably a better system than prison, since restitution was made and the person was accountable for it.  Verse four adds, If the theft be certainly found in his hand alive, whether it be ox, or ass, or sheep; he shall restore double.  If the stolen animals were still alive, then the restitution was the be two for one for either animal.  Verse five declares, If a man shall cause a field or vineyard to be eaten, and shall put in his beast, and shall feed in another man’s field; of the best of his own field, and of the best of his own vineyard, shall he make restitution.  There was a penalty for a person  allowing his animals to graze in his neighbors field or vineyard.  If he did so, he was to pay with the best of his crop from his own field or vineyard.  This would imply that the person doing this had a way to feed his animals from his own possessions.  We cannot attempt to use what others own simply to save what we own.  Verse six states, If fire break out, and catch in thorns, so that the stacks of corn, or the standing corn, or the field, be consumed therewith; he that kindled the fire shall surely make restitution.  There was a penalty for starting a fire that got out of control.  This wasn't just about arson, but about any fire that was started that consumed another's property.  We see a lot about fires causing devastation in the world today, but there is usually little restitution even if it was caused by arson and the arsonist is caught.  Verse seven proclaims, If a man shall deliver unto his neighbour money or stuff to keep, and it be stolen out of the man’s house; if the thief be found, let him pay double.  If a neighbor was keeping something of value for another neighbor, and it was stolen and the thief caught, then the thief would be required to pay double what was stolen.  Verse eight adds, If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges, to see whether he have put his hand unto his neighbour’s goods.  If the thief were not found in this case, the master, or owner, of the house would be brought before the judges to determine if he had stolen the goods himself.  The theft could not just be written off to some unknown thief.  Just as the master of the house then, we need to be held accountable for protecting the property of others that they may have entrusted us with.  Verse nine declares, For all manner of trespass, whether it be for ox, for ass, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, which another challengeth to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; and whom the judges shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbour.  If there was a dispute over the ownership of any property, it was to be brought before the judges.  Whichever person was found to be at fault was to make restitution at double the value of the disputed property.  This should have cut down on false claims and lawsuits.  Verse ten states, If a man deliver unto his neighbour an ass, or an ox, or a sheep, or any beast, to keep; and it die, or be hurt, or driven away, no man seeing it:  Then verse eleven adds, Then shall an oath of the LORD be between them both, that he hath not put his hand unto his neighbour’s goods; and the owner of it shall accept thereof, and he shall not make it good.  If an animal was stolen and could not be found, then there was to be an oath to God that the one in possession had not just taken the animal for his own use.  These were God's people, and we have to assume that taking such an oath would have meant that they were telling the truth.  After the oath, the one in possession of the property would be held unaccountable.  Just like then, especially as God's people, we must respect the rights of our neighbors.  Verse twelve continues, And if it be stolen from him, he shall make restitution unto the owner thereof.  Then verse thirteen concludes, If it be torn in pieces, then let him bring it for witness, and he shall not make good that which was torn.  If the person was held to have stolen the animal, he would be responsible, but if the animal had been killed and torn to pieces by another animal or person, then the man would not be responsible.