It is ordered that […], given the fact that, when the damages are assessed in the grain fields, [the damage has been caused] in more than half ´robo´ [surface unit?] and only one animal is seized, [the animal] is only responsible for reimboursing the said half ´robo´ and the rest of the damage is paid by the guards and [however] it seems fair that the said guards should not pay anything; it is ordered that, when any damage was assessed in more than half ´robo´ and there was no more than one animal [seized], the [owner of that] animal shall be responsible for reimboursing all the damage, and the owner of that animal is entitled to look for other damaging persons both in the orchards and in the mountain. [confusing writing].