[ULPIANUS libro uicensimo nono ad edictum. ] §15.3.5.prSi res domino non necessarias emerit seruus quasi domino necessarias, ueluti seruos, hactenus uideri in rem eius uersum Pomponius scribit, quatenus seruorum uerum pretium facit, cum, si necessarias emisset, in solidum quanto uenissent teneretur.
[ULPIAN, on the edict, book 29] Pomponius writes that if a slave buys things that are not necessary for the master as if they were necessary for him, for example, other slaves, it is deemed to have been turned to his account only to the extent of the true value of the slaves, whereas, if he had bought necessary things, the master would be liable in full for the price at which they were sold.
§15.3.5.1Idem ait, siue ratum habeat serui contractum dominus siue non, de in rem uerso esse actionem.
The same writer says that, whether the master ratifies the slave's contract or not, an action for what has been turned to his account lies.
§15.3.5.2Quod seruus domino emit, si quidem uoluntate eius emit, potest quod iussu agi: sin uero non ex uoluntate, si quidem dominus ratum habuerit uel alioquin rem necessariam uel utilem domino emit, de in rem uerso actio erit: si uero nihil eorum est, de peculio erit actio.
Regarding what a slave buys for his master, if indeed he buys it by the master's will, the action on authorization can be brought; but if not by his will, then if indeed the master ratifies it or otherwise the slave buys something necessary or useful for the master, there will be an action for what has been turned to his account; but if it is none of these, there will be an action on the peculium.
§15.3.5.3Placet non solum eam pecuniam in rem uerti, quae statim a creditore ad dominum peruenerit, sed et quae prius fuerit in peculio.
It is accepted that not only that money which comes immediately from the creditor to the master is turned to his account, but also that which was previously in the peculium.
hoc autem totiens uerum est, quotiens seruus rem domini gerens locupletiorem eum facit nummis peculiaribus.
However, this is true only so often as the slave, in managing the master's affairs, makes him richer with money from the peculium.
alioquin si seruo peculium dominus adimat uel si uendat eum cum peculio uel rem eius peculiarem et pretium exigat, non uidetur in rem uersum.
Otherwise, if the master deprives the slave of his peculium, or if he sells him with his peculium, or sells a thing belonging to his peculium and exacts the price, it is not deemed to have been turned to his account.