He who gives up his share in a slave, and has enough money to pay the full price of the slave, then full emancipation devolves upon him; but if he has not the money, then he emancipated what he emancipated.
He who emancipates his share in the slave, it is his responsibility to secure full freedom for him provided he (the slave) has enough money to pay the (remaining) price, but it he has not so much money he would be emancipated to the extent that the first man emancipated.
He who gives up his share in a slave, and he has money enough to meet the full price, a fair price for him should be fixed; otherwise be has emancipated him to the extent that he has emancipated.
He who emancipates a slave (shared) by him and another one, his full price may be justly assessed from his wealth, neither less nor more, and he (the slave) would be emancipated if he (the partner) would be solvent enough (to forgo the amount of his share).
He who emancipates his portion in a slave, full emancipation may be secured for him out of his property (if he has money) if he has enough property to meet (the required expenses), but if he has not enough property, the slave should be put to extra labour (in order to earn money for buying his freedom), but he should not be overburdened.