[TRYPHONINUS libro secundo disputationum. ] §26.7.54.prNon existimo maximis usuris subiciendum eum, qui a contutoribus suis mutuam pecuniam pupilli accepit et cauit certasque usuras promisit, quas et alii debitores pupillo dependunt, quia hic sibi non consumpsit nec clam nec quasi sua pecunia licenter abutitur et, nisi his usuris a contutore mutuum ei daretur, aliunde accepisset: et multum refert, palam aperteque debitorem se ut extraneum et quemlibet faceret pupillo an sub administratione tutelae pupillique utilitate latente sua commoda pupilli pecunia iuuaret.
I do not think that a person who accepted a loan of the ward's money from his co-guardians, gave security, and promised a certain rate of interest, which other debtors also pay to the ward, should be subjected to the highest rate of interest, because this person did not consume it for his own purposes, nor did he secretly or as if it were his own money license himself to abuse it, and, if a loan had not been given to him by the co-guardian at this rate of interest, he would have obtained it from elsewhere. And there is a great difference whether he made himself a debtor to the ward publicly and openly as a stranger and any ordinary person, or under the cover of the administration of the guardianship, while the ward's interest was neglected, promoted his own advantages with the ward's money.