[PAULUS libro tertio ad edictum. ] §2.1.9.prSi familia alicuius album corruperit, non similiter hic edicitur ut in furto, ne in reliquos actio detur, si tantum dominus, cum defendere uoluit, unius nomine praestiterit, quantum liber praestaret: fortasse quia hic et contempta maiestas praetoris uindicatur et plura facta intelleguntur: quemadmodum cum plures serui iniuriam fecerunt uel damnum dederunt, quia plura facta sunt, non ut in furto unum.
If anyone's household of slaves damages the album, the edict here is not issued in the same way as in the case of theft, so that an action is not granted against the remaining slaves if the master, when wishing to defend them, has paid on behalf of one slave as much as a free person would pay; perhaps because in this case both the affronted majesty of the praetor is vindicated and multiple acts are understood to have occurred, just as when several slaves have committed an injury or caused damage, because multiple acts have occurred, not a single one as in the case of theft.
Octauenus hic quoque domino succurrendum ait: sed hoc potest dici, si dolo malo curauerint, ut ab alio album corrumperetur, quia tunc unum consilium sit, non plura facta.
Octavenus says that here too the master should be assisted; but this can be said if they have maliciously arranged for the album to be damaged by someone else, because in that case there is a single plan, not multiple acts.
idem Pomponius libro decimo notat.
Pomponius notes the same in his tenth book.