[ULPIANUS libro trigensimo sexto ad Sabinum. ] §24.3.14.prAlia causa est defensoris, quem placet sufficienter uideri defendisse, si tantum uxori praestet, quantum consequeretur, si ipsum maritum conuenisset.
[ULPIANUS, Book 36 on Sabinus] The case of a defender is different; it is accepted that he is deemed to have defended sufficiently, if he performs for the wife only as much as she would have obtained if she had sued the husband himself.
§24.3.14.1Eleganter quaerit Pomponius libro quinto decimo ex Sabino, si paciscatur maritus, ne in id quod facere possit condemnetur, sed in solidum, an hoc pactum seruandum sit? et negat seruari oportere, quod quidem et mihi uidetur uerum: namque contra bonos mores id pactum esse melius est dicere, quippe cum contra receptam reuerentiam, quae maritis exhibenda est, id esse apparet.
Pomponius elegantly inquires in his fifteenth book on Sabinus, if a husband agrees that he should be condemned not for what he is able to do, but for the whole amount, whether this agreement ought to be observed? And he says that it ought not to be observed, which indeed seems true to me also: for it is better to say that this agreement is contrary to good morals, since it is apparent that it is contrary to the accepted reverence which ought to be shown to husbands.