[PAULUS libro quinto quaestionum. ] §19.5.5.prNaturalis meus filius seruit tibi et tuus filius mihi: conuenit inter nos, ut et tu meum manumitteres et ego tuum: ego manumisi, tu non manumissisti: qua actione mihi teneris, quaesitum est.
[PAULUS in the fifth book of Questions.] My natural son is serving you, and your son is serving me: it was agreed between us that you should manumit mine, and I should manumit yours. I manumitted, but you did not manumit: the question arose, by what action you are bound to me.
in hac quaestione totius ob rem dati tractatus inspici potest.
In this question, the entire consideration of what is given for a purpose (ob rem datum) can be examined.
qui in his competit speciebus: aut enim do tibi ut des, aut do ut facias, aut facio ut des, aut facio ut facias: in quibus quaeritur, quae obligatio nascatur.
This applies to these species: for either I give to you that you may give (do ut des), or I give that you may do (do ut facias), or I do that you may give (facio ut des), or I do that you may do (facio ut facias): in which it is asked what obligation arises.
§19.5.5.1Et si quidem pecuniam dem, ut rem accipiam, emptio et uenditio est: sin autem rem do, ut rem accipiam, quia non placet permutationem rerum emptionem esse, dubium non est nasci ciuilem obligationem, in qua actione id ueniet, non ut reddas quod acceperis, sed ut damneris mihi, quanti interest mea illud de quo conuenit accipere: uel si meum recipere uelim, repetatur quod datum est, quasi ob rem datum re non secuta.
And indeed, if I give money in order to receive a thing, it is a sale (emptio et uenditio); but if I give a thing in order to receive a thing, since it is not accepted that the exchange of things is a sale, there is no doubt that a civil obligation arises. In this action, the issue will be, not that you should return what you received, but that you should be condemned to pay me the amount of my interest in receiving that which was agreed upon; or, if I should wish to recover my own, what was given may be reclaimed, as having been given for a purpose which was not followed by the result.
sed si scyphos tibi dedi, ut Stichum mihi dares, periculo meo Stichus erit ac tu dumtaxat culpam praestare debes. explicitus est articulus ille do ut des.
But if I gave you cups so that you would give me Stichus, Stichus will be at my risk, and you must answer only for fault (culpa). That clause 'I give that you may give' (do ut des) has been explained.
§19.5.5.2At cum do ut facias, si tale sit factum, quod locari solet, puta ut tabulam pingas, pecunia data locatio erit, sicut superiore casu emptio: si rem do, non erit locatio, sed nascetur uel ciuilis actio in hoc quod mea interest uel ad repetendum condictio.
But when I give that you may do (do ut facias), if the act is of such a kind as is customary to be let, for instance, that you paint a picture, if money is given it will be a hiring (locatio), just as in the former case it was a sale; if I give a thing, it will not be a hiring, but there will arise either a civil action for my interest, or a condictio for recovery.
quod si tale est factum, quod locari non possit, puta ut seruum manumittas, siue certum tempus adiectum est, intra quod manumittatur idque, cum potuisset manumitti, uiuo seruo transierit, siue finitum non fuit et tantum temporis consumptum sit, ut potuerit debueritque manumitti, condici ei potest uel praescriptis uerbis agi: quod his quae diximus conuenit.
But if the act is of such a kind that it cannot be let, for instance, that you manumit a slave, whether a certain time was added within which he should be manumitted and that time passed while the slave was alive, although he could have been manumitted, or whether no limit was fixed and so much time has been consumed that he could and should have been manumitted, a condictio can be brought against him, or an action can be brought with prescribed words (praescriptis uerbis agi); which agrees with what we have said.
sed si dedi tibi seruum, ut seruum tuum manumitteres, et manumissisti et is quem dedi euictus est, si sciens dedi, de dolo in me dandam actionem Iulianus scribit, si ignorans, in factum ciuilem.
But if I gave you a slave so that you would manumit your slave, and you manumitted him, and the one I gave was evicted, Julian writes that if I gave him knowing this, an action for fraud (de dolo) should be granted against me, but if I gave him in ignorance, a civil action on the facts (in factum ciuilem) should be granted.
§19.5.5.3Quod si faciam ut des et posteaquam feci, cessas dare, nulla erit ciuilis actio, et ideo de dolo dabitur.
But if I do that you may give (facio ut des), and after I have done so, you fail to give, there will be no civil action, and therefore an action for fraud (de dolo) will be granted.
§19.5.5.4Sed si facio ut facias, haec species tractatus plures recipit.
But if I do that you may do (facio ut facias), this species of consideration admits of more cases.
nam si pacti sumus, ut tu a meo debitore Carthagine exigas, ego a tuo Romae, uel ut tu in meo, ego in tuo solo aedificem, et ego aedificaui et tu cessas, in priorem speciem mandatum quodammodo interuenisse uidetur, sine quo exigi pecunia alieno nomine non potest: quamuis enim et impendia sequantur, tamen mutuum officium praestamus et potest mandatum ex pacto etiam naturam suam excedere (possum enim tibi mandare, ut et custodiam mihi praestes et non plus impendas in exigendo quam decem): et si eandem quantitatem impenderemus, nulla dubitatio est.
For if we have agreed that you should collect from my debtor in Carthage, and I from yours in Rome, or that you should build on my ground and I on yours, and I have built and you fail to do so, in the former case a mandate (mandatum) seems in a way to have intervened, without which money cannot be collected in another's name; for although expenses also follow, yet we render a mutual service, and a mandate can by agreement even exceed its own nature (for I can mandate you both to provide custody for me and not to spend more than ten in collecting); and if we were to spend the same amount, there is no doubt.
sin autem alter fecit, ut et hic mandatum interuenisse uideatur, quasi refundandus inuicem impensas: neque enim de re tua tibi mando.
But if one party has performed, so that here too a mandate seems to have intervened, as if they are to refund each other's expenses in turn; for I do not mandate you concerning your own affair.
sed tutius erit et in insulis fabricandis et in debitoribus exigendis praescriptis uerbis dari actionem, quae actio similis erit mandati actioni, quemadmodum in superioribus casibus locationi et emptioni.
But it will be safer, both in constructing apartment buildings and in collecting from debtors, for an action with prescribed words (praescriptis uerbis) to be granted, which action will be similar to the action on mandate, just as in the former cases to hiring and sale.
§19.5.5.5si ergo haec sunt, ubi de faciendo ab utroque conuenit, et in proposita quaestione idem dici potest et necessario sequitur, ut eius fiat condemnatio, quanti interest mea seruum habere quem manumisi.
If, therefore, these things are so where there is an agreement by both parties about doing (de faciendo), the same can be said in the proposed question, and it follows of necessity that the condemnation should be made for the amount of my interest in having the slave whom I manumitted.
an deducendum erit, quod libertum habeo? sed hoc non potest aestimari.
Or should a deduction be made for the fact that I have a freedman? But this cannot be financially estimated.