[IDEM libro trigesimo sexto ad edictum. ] §12.3.4.prUideamus in tutelari causa quis iurare et aduersus quem possit.
[THE SAME, Thirty-sixth Book on the Edict.] Let us see who can swear, and against whom, in an action concerning guardianship.
et quidem ipse pupillus, si impubes est, non potest: hoc enim saepissime rescriptum est.
And indeed, the ward himself, if he is below the age of puberty, cannot; for this has very frequently been stated in rescripts.
sed nec tutorem cogendum uel matrem pupilli admittendam, etsi parata esset iurare, diui fratres rescripserunt: graue enim uidebatur et ignorantes et inuitos tutores sub alieni compendii emolumento etiam periurium anceps subire.
But the deified brothers also replied by rescript that neither should a tutor be compelled, nor should the ward's mother be admitted, even if she were ready to swear; for it seemed harsh that tutors, who are ignorant and unwilling, should undergo even the hazard of perjury for the sake of another's gain.
curatores quoque pupilli uel adulescentis non esse cogendos in litem iurare rescriptis imperatoris nostri et diui patris eius continetur.
It is also contained in the rescripts of our Emperor and of his deified father that curators of a ward or of a youth are not to be compelled to swear in court.
si tamen tantam affectionem pupillo suo uel adulescenti tutores uel curatores praestare uolunt, auctoritas iuris non refragabitur, quin iudicio, quod inter ipsos acceptum est, finis eiusmodi possit adhiberi.
If, however, tutors or curators wish to display such affection toward their ward or youth, the authority of the law will not oppose that such an end be put to the trial which has been accepted between them.
non enim ad suam utilitatem iurisiurandi referenda aestimatio est, sed ad domini, cuius nomine tutelae ratio postulatur.
For the valuation of the oath is not to be referred to their own benefit, but to that of the owner in whose name the account of the guardianship is demanded.
adulescens uero si uelit iurare potest.
But a youth, if he wishes, can swear.
§12.3.4.1Deferre autem iusiurandum iudicem oportet: ceterum si alius detulerit iusiurandum uel non delato iuratum sit, nulla erit religio nec ullum iusiurandum: et ita constitutionibus expressum est imperatoris nostri et diui patris eius.
Moreover, the judge ought to tender the oath; but if someone else tenders the oath, or if the oath is taken without it being tendered, there will be no binding obligation nor any oath; and this is expressly stated in the constitutions of our Emperor and of his deified father.
§12.3.4.2Iurare autem in infinitum licet.
Moreover, it is permitted to swear without limit.
sed an iudex modum iuriiurando statuere possit, ut intra certam quantitatem iuretur, ne arrepta occasione in immensum iuretur, quaero.
But I ask whether the judge can set a limit to the oath, so that the oath may be taken within a certain quantity, lest, the opportunity being seized, the oath be taken to an immeasurable amount.
et quidem in arbitrio esse iudicis deferre iusiurandum nec ne constat: an igitur qui possit iusiurandum non deferre, idem possit et taxationem iuriiurando adicere, quaeritur: arbitrio tamen bonae fidei iudicis etiam hoc congruit.
And indeed, it is established that it is within the discretion of the judge whether to tender the oath or not; is it therefore asked whether he who can refuse to tender the oath can also add a limitation to the oath? Yet this also is consistent with the discretion of a good faith judge.
§12.3.4.3Item uidendum, an possit iudex, qui detulit iusiurandum, non sequi id, sed uel prorsus absoluere uel etiam minoris condemnare quam iuratum est: et magis est, ut ex magna causa et postea repertis probationibus possit.
Likewise, it must be considered whether a judge who has tendered the oath can choose not to follow it, but either to acquit entirely or to condemn for a lesser amount than was sworn to; and the better opinion is that he can do so for a great cause and if proofs are discovered later.
§12.3.4.4Ex culpa autem non esse iusiurandum deferendum constat, sed aestimationem a iudice faciendam.
Furthermore, it is established that where there is mere negligence, the oath is not to be tendered, but the valuation must be made by the judge.