§7.6.1scripti et voluntatis frequentissima inter consultos quaestio est, et pars magna controversi iuris hinc pendet; quo minus id accidere in scholis mirum est, ubi etiam ex industria fingitur.
The question of the letter and the intention is the most frequent among lawyers, and a great part of disputed law depends on this; hence it is the less surprising that this happens in the schools, where they are even devised on purpose.
eius genus unum est, in quo et de scripto et de voluntate quaeritur.
One class of it is that in which inquiry is made both about the letter and about the intention.
§7.6.2id tum accidit, cum est in lege aliqua obscuritas.
This happens when there is some obscurity in a law.
in ea aut uterque suam interpretationem confirmat, adversarii subvertit: ut hic, fur quadruplum solvat. duo surripuerunt pariter decem milia; petuntur ab utroque quadragena; illi postulant, ut vicena conferant; nam et actor dicit hoc esse quadruplum quod petat, et rei hoc quod offerant; voluntas quoque utrinque defenditur.
In such a case, either party confirms their own interpretation and subverts that of the adversary: as in this case, 'Let a thief pay fourfold.' Two persons stole ten thousand sesterces together; forty thousand are demanded from each; they request that they should contribute twenty thousand each; for both the plaintiff says that what he demands is the fourfold, and the defendants say that what they offer is; the intention also is defended on both sides.
§7.6.3aut, cum de altero intellectu certum est, de altero dubium: ex meretrice natus ne contionetur. quae filium habebat, prostare coepit: prohibetur adolescens contione.
Or, when there is certainty about one interpretation, but doubt about the other: 'Let him who is born of a prostitute not speak in the assembly.' A woman who had a son began to practice prostitution; the young man is forbidden from the assembly.
nam de eius filio, quae ante partum meretrix fuit, certum est: an eadem huius causa sit, dubium est, quia ex hac natus est, antequam meretrix esset.
For concerning the son of her who was a prostitute before his birth, there is no doubt; but whether this young man's case is the same is doubtful, because he was born of her before she was a prostitute.
§7.6.4solet et illud quaeri, quo referatur, quod scriptum est, bis de eadem re ne sit actio;
It is also commonly asked to what that which is written refers, namely, 'Let there not be an action twice on the same matter'; that is, does this 'twice' refer to the plaintiff or to the action?
id est, hoc bis ad actorem an ad actionem? haec ex iure obscuro.
These arise from obscure law.
alterum genus est ex manifesto; quod qui solum viderunt, hunc statum plani et voluntatis appellarunt. in hoc altera pars scripto nititur, altera voluntate.
The other class is from what is plain; those who saw only this called this status 'of the plain and the intention.' In this, one party relies on the letter, the other on the intention.
Sed contra scriptum tribus generibus occurritur.
But against the letter, opposition is made in three ways.
§7.6.5unum est, in quo ipso patet, semper id servari non posse: liberi parentis alant ad vinciantur; non enim adligabitur infans.
One is where it is clear in itself that it cannot always be observed: 'Let children support their parents or be bound'; for an infant will not be bound.
hic erit ad alia transitus, et divisio, num quisquis non aluerit, num hic propter hoc.
Here there will be a transition to other points and a division: whether anyone who has not supported them, or whether this person on account of this.
§7.6.6secundum tale genus controversiarum, in quo nullum argumentum est, quod ex lege ipsa peti possit, sed de eo tantum, de quo lis est, quaerendum est.
The second is such a class of controversies in which there is no argument that can be drawn from the law itself, but we must inquire only about the matter which is the subject of the lawsuit.
Peregrinus, si murum ascenderit, capite puniatur. cum hostes murum ascendissent, peregrinus eos depulit; petitur ad supplicium.
'Let a foreigner, if he ascends the wall, be punished with death.' When enemies had ascended the wall, a foreigner drove them back; he is demanded for punishment.
§7.6.7non erunt hic separatae quaestiones, an quisquis, an hic, quia nullum potest adferri argumentum contra scriptum vehementius eo quod in lite est; sed hoc tantum, an ne servandae quidem civitatis causa.
Here there will not be separate questions, whether anyone, or whether this person, because no argument can be brought against the letter stronger than that which is in the lawsuit; but only this, whether even for the sake of saving the state.
ergo aequitate et voluntate pugnandum.
Therefore, one must fight with equity and intention.
fieri tamen potest, ut ex aliis legibus exempla ducamus, per quae appareat semper stari scripto non posse, ut Cicero pro Caecina fecit.
It is possible, however, to draw examples from other laws, through which it may appear that the letter cannot always be adhered to, as Cicero did in his speech for Caecina.
§7.6.8tertium, cum in ipsis verbis legis reperimus aliquid, per quod probemus aliud legumlatorem voluisse, ut in hac controversia: qui nocte cum ferro deprehensus fuerit, adligetur. cum anulo ferreo inuentum magistratus adligavit.
The third is when we find something in the very words of the law by which we may prove that the legislator intended something else, as in this controversy: 'Let him who is caught at night with iron be bound.' A magistrate bound a man found with an iron ring.
hic quia est verbum in lege deprehensus, satis etiam significatum videtur, non contineri lege nisi noxium ferrum.
Here, because there is the word 'caught' in the law, it seems sufficiently indicated that nothing but harmful iron is comprised in the law.
§7.6.9sed ut qui voluntate nitetur scriptum, quotiens poterit, infirmare debebit, ita, qui scriptum tuebitur, adiuvare se etiam voluntate temptabit.
But just as he who relies on the intention must, whenever he can, weaken the letter, so he who defends the letter will also try to assist himself by the intention.
in testamentis et illa accidunt, ut voluntas manifesta sit, scriptum nihil sit: ut in iudicio Curiano, in quo nota L. Crassi et Scaevolae fuit contentio.
In wills, it also happens that the intention is manifest, but nothing is written: as in the Curian trial, in which there was the famous dispute between Lucius Crassus and Scaevola.
§7.6.10substitutus heres erat, si postumus ante tutelae annos decessisset.
A substitute heir had been appointed if the posthumous child should die before the age of guardianship.
non est natus.
The child was not born.
propinqui bona sibi vindicabant.
The relatives claimed the property for themselves.
quis dubitaret, quin ea voluntas fuisset testantis, ut is non nato filio heres esset, qui mortuo? sed hoc non scripserat.
Who would doubt that it had been the intention of the testator that he who would be the heir if the son died should be the heir if he was not born? But he had not written this.
§7.6.11id quoque, quod huic contrarium est, accidit nuper, ut esset scriptum, quod appareret scriptorem noluisse.
The contrary to this also happened recently, namely, that what it was clear the writer had not wished was written.
qui sestertium nummum quinque milia legaverat, cum emendaret testamentum, sublatis sestertiis nummis, argenti pondo posuit, quinque milia manserunt.
A person who had bequeathed five thousand sesterces, when correcting his will, having erased 'sesterces', substituted 'pounds of silver', and 'five thousand' remained.
apparuit tamen, quinque pondo dari voluisse, quia ille in argento legati modus et inauditus erat et incredibilis.
It was clear, however, that he had wished to give five pounds, because that amount in a bequest of silver was both unheard of and incredible.
§7.6.12sub hoc statu generales sunt quaestiones, scripto an voluntate standum sit, quae fuerit scribentis voluntas; tractatus omnes qualitatis aut coniecturae, de quibus satis dictum arbitror.
Under this status, the general questions are whether one should stand by the letter or by the intention, and what the intention of the writer was; all treatments belong to quality or conjecture, concerning which I think enough has been said.