- Source
- Digesta Iustiniani Augusti. Mommsen, Theodor & Krueger, Paul, editors. Berlin: Weidmann, 1870.
- Translation
- AI-generated (gemini-3.5-flash) — machine translation; may contain errors
- Languages
- 日本語 · English · 简体中文 · 한국어
- CTS URN
- urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:4.4.37.pr-4.4.37.1
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-11-08
This section discusses how the remedy of reinstatement is not available for the execution of penalties or in cases of delicts, specifically explaining that a minor under twenty-five cannot invoke age to excuse a failure to prosecute adultery within the legal timeframe or to escape punishment for related offenses.
[TRYPHONINUS libro tertio disputationum.]
[TRYPHONINUS, in the third book of Disputations.]
Auxilium in integrum restitutionis exsecutionibus poenarum paratum non est: ideoque iniuriarum iudicium semel omissum repeti non potest.
The remedy of reinstatement is not available for the execution of penalties; and therefore an action for damages for insult, once omitted, cannot be renewed.
Sed et in sexaginta diebus praeteritis,1 in quibus iure mariti sine calumnia uir accusare mulierem adulterii potest, denegatur ei in integrum restitutio: quod ius omissum si nunc repetere uult, quid aliud quam delicti ueniam, id est calumniae deprecatur? et cum neque in delictis neque in calumniatoribus praetorem succurrere oportere certi iuris sit,2 cessabit in integrum restitutio. in delictis autem minor annis uiginti quinque non meretur in integrum restitutionem, utique atrocioribus, nisi quatenus interdum miseratio aetatis ad mediocrem poenam iudicem produxerit. sed ut ad legis Iuliae de adulteriis coercendis praecepta ueniamus, utique nulla deprecatio adulterii poenae est, si se minor annis adulterum fateatur. dixi,3 nec si quid eorum commiserit, quae pro adulterio eadem lex punit, ueluti si adulterii damnatam sciens uxorem duxerit, aut in adulterio deprehensam uxorem non dimiserit, quaestumue de adulterio uxoris fecerit, pretiumue pro comperto stupro acceperit, aut domum praebuerit ad stuprum adulteriumue in eam committendum: et non sit aetatis excusatio aduersus praecepta legum ei, qui dum leges inuocat, contra eas committit.
But also, when the sixty days have elapsed, within which a husband by right of a husband can accuse his wife of adultery without suspicion of calumny, reinstatement is denied to him; for if he now wishes to recover this omitted right, what else is he begging for than the pardon of a delict, that is, of calumny? And since it is an established rule of law that the praetor ought to give no assistance either in the case of delicts or to calumniators, reinstatement will not be granted. Moreover, in the case of delicts, a person under twenty-five years of age does not deserve reinstatement, at all events in the more atrocious ones, except in so far as sometimes compassion for youth may lead the judge to a moderate penalty. But to come to the rules of the Lex Julia on restraining adulteries, there is certainly no begging off from the penalty of adultery if a minor confesses that he is an adulterer. I have said that this is also the case if he should commit any of those acts which the same law punishes as adultery, as, for example, if he knowingly marries a woman convicted of adultery, or does not divorce a wife caught in adultery, or makes a profit from his wife’s adultery, or accepts a price for discovered illicit intercourse, or provides his house for illicit intercourse or adultery to be committed therein; and there is no excuse of age against the rules of the laws for him who, while invoking the laws, commits an offence against them.
- 4.4.37.1in sexaginta diebus praeteritis
Meaning 'the sixty days having elapsed'. This ablative phrase indicates the legal fact that the statutory sixty-day period, during which a husband is privileged to accuse his wife of adultery by right of a husband, has passed, and thus no relief is granted for this negligence.
- 4.4.37.1certi iuris sit
The genitive phrase 'certi iuris' behaves like the impersonal 'certum est' (it is settled law), functioning as a predicative genitive of characteristic taking the accusative and infinitive clause 'praetorem succurrere oportere' as its subject.
- 4.4.37.1dixi
Literally 'I have said'. It is a first-person perfect verb inserted by the jurist to refer back to a previous statement or established opinion of his own, extending the same legal consequence to the subsequent conditional clauses.