[IDEM libro trigensimo primo ad edictum. ] §17.2.52.8Idem Papinianus eodem libro ait, si inter fratres uoluntarium consortium initum fuerit, et stipendia ceteraque salaria in commune redigi iudicio societatis, quamuis filius emancipatus haec non cogatur conferre fratri, inquit, in potestate manenti, quia et si in potestate maneret, praecipua ea haberet.
The same Papinian says in the same book that if a voluntary partnership has been entered into between brothers, pay and other salaries are brought into the common stock by the action of partnership, although, he says, an emancipated son is not compelled to contribute these to his brother who remains in power, because even if he had remained in power, he would have had them as his separate property.
§17.2.52.9Idem respondit societatem non posse ultra mortem porrigi, et ideo nec libertatem de supremis iudiciis constringere quis poterit uel cognatum ulteriorem proximioribus praeferre.
The same jurist answered that a partnership cannot be extended beyond death, and therefore no one can restrict their freedom concerning last wills, or prefer a more remote relative to closer ones.
§17.2.52.10Idem respondit: socius, qui cessantis cessantiumue portiones insulae restituerit, quamuis aut sortem cum certis usuris intra quattuor menses, postquam opus refectum erit, recipere potest exigendoque priuilegio utetur aut deinceps propriam rem habebit, potest tamen pro socio agere ad hoc, ut consequatur quod sua intererat.
The same jurist answered: a partner who has repaired the shares of an apartment block belonging to one or more partners who fail to do so, although he can recover the principal with specified interest within four months after the work has been completed and will enjoy a privilege of recovery, or thereafter will have the thing as his own, can nevertheless sue by the action of partnership to obtain the amount of his interest.
finge enim malle eum magis suum consequi quam dominium insulae.
For suppose that he prefers to recover his own rather than the ownership of the apartment block.
oratio enim diui Marci idcirco quattuor mensibus finit certas usuras, quia post quattuor dominium dedit.
For the speech of the deified Marcus limits the specified interest to four months for the reason that after four months it granted ownership.
§17.2.52.11Si qui societatem ad emendum coierint, deinde res alterius dolo uel culpa empta non sit, pro socio esse actionem constat.
If some persons have entered into a partnership for purchasing, and then through the malice or negligence of one party the thing was not bought, it is established that there is an action of partnership.
plane si condicio sit adiecta 'si intra illum diem ueniret', et dies sine culpa socii praeterierit, cessabit actio pro socio.
Clearly, if a condition was added 'if it should be sold within that day', and the day passed without the partner's fault, the action of partnership will cease.
§17.2.52.12Item si in communem riuum reficiendum inpensa facta sit, pro socio esse actionem ad reciperandum sumptum Cassius scripsit.
Likewise, if an expense has been incurred for repairing a common water-channel, Cassius wrote that there is an action of partnership to recover the expenditure.
§17.2.52.13Item Mela scribit, si uicini semipedes inter se contulerunt, ut ibi craticium parietem inter se aedificarent ad onera utriusque sustinenda, deinde aedificato pariete alter in eum inmitti non patiatur, pro socio agendum.
Likewise Mela writes that if neighbors have contributed half a foot each between them, so that they might build a wattle wall between them to support the loads of both, and then, the wall having been built, one does not allow the other to insert beams into it, they must sue by the action of partnership.
idemque et si aream in commune emerint, ne luminibus suis officeretur, et alteri tradita sit nec praestet alteri quod conuenit, pro socio actionem esse.
And likewise if they have bought a vacant space in common so that their light might not be obstructed, and it was delivered to one of them, and he does not perform for the other what was agreed, there is an action of partnership.
§17.2.52.14Si plures sint inter eosdem societates coitae, ad omnes societates sufficere hoc unum iudicium constat.
If several partnerships have been entered into between the same persons, it is established that this one action is sufficient for all the partnerships.
§17.2.52.15Si quis ex sociis propter societatem profectus sit, ueluti ad merces emendas, eos dumtaxat sumptuum societati imputabit qui in eam rem impensi sunt: uiatica igitur et meritoriorum et stabulorum, iumentorum carrulorum uecturas uel sui uel sarcinarum suarum gratia uel mercium recte imputabit.
If any of the partners has set out on account of the partnership, as for example to buy goods, he shall charge to the partnership only those expenses which were spent on that matter; therefore he will rightly charge travel expenses, and expenses of inns and stables, and the carriage of beasts of burden and carriages, either for the sake of himself, his baggage, or the goods.
§17.2.52.16Socium uniuersa in societatem conferre debere Neratius ait, si omnium bonorum socius sit: et ideo siue ob iniuriam sibi factam uel ex lege Aquilia, siue ipsius siue filii corpori nocitum sit, conferre debere respondit.
Neratius says that a partner ought to contribute everything into the partnership, if he is a partner of all goods; and therefore he answered that whether on account of an injury done to himself, or under the Aquilian law, whether harm was done to his own body or to that of his son, he ought to contribute.
§17.2.52.17Ibidem ait socium omnium bonorum non cogi conferre, quae ex prohibitis causis adquisierit.
In the same place he says that a partner of all goods is not compelled to contribute what he has acquired from prohibited causes.
§17.2.52.18Per contrarium quoque apud ueteres tractatur, an socius omnium bonorum, si quid ob iniuriarum actionem damnatus praestiterit, ex communi consequatur ut praestet.
The converse is also discussed among the ancient jurists, namely, whether a partner of all goods, if he has paid anything upon being condemned in an action for injuries, can recover from the common fund so that it may be paid.
et Atilicinus Sabinus Cassius responderunt, si iniuria iudicis damnatus sit, consecuturum, si ob maleficium suum, ipsum tantum damnum sentire debere.
And Atilicinus, Sabinus, and Cassius answered that if he was condemned through the injustice of the judge, he will recover; but if on account of his own wrongdoing, he himself alone ought to bear the loss.
cui congruit, quod Seruium respondisse Aufidius refert, si socii bonorum fuerint, deinde unus, cum ad iudicium non adesset, damnatus sit, non debere eum de communi id consequi, si uero praesens iniuriam iudicis passus sit, de communi sarciendum.
With which agrees what Aufidius reports Servius to have answered, that if they were partners of goods, and then one was condemned when he was not present at the trial, he ought not to recover that from the common fund; but if he was present and suffered the injustice of the judge, it must be made good from the common fund.