[ULPIANUS libro trigesimo sexto ad edictum. ] §27.3.1.prIn omnibus quae fecit tutor, cum facere non deberet, item in his quae non fecit, rationem reddet hoc iudicio, praestando dolum, culpam et quantam in suis rebus diligentiam.
[ULPIANUS, from the thirty-sixth book on the Edict.] In all things which a tutor did when he ought not to have done them, and likewise in those things which he did not do, he shall render an account in this action, being liable for fraud, fault, and such diligence as he shows in his own affairs.
§27.3.1.1Unde quaeritur apud Iulianum libro uicensimo primo digestorum, si tutor pupillo auctoritatem ad mortis causa donationem accommodauerit, an tutelae iudicio teneatur.
Hence a question is raised in Julian's twenty-first book of Digests: if a tutor has given his authorization to a ward for a donation mortis causa, is he liable under the action of guardianship?
et ait teneri eum: nam sicuti testamenti factio, inquit, pupillis concessa non est, ita nec mortis quidem causa donationes permittendae sunt.
And he says that he is liable; for, he says, just as the capacity to make a will is not granted to wards, so also donations mortis causa are not to be permitted.
§27.3.1.2Sed et si non mortis causa donauerit tutore auctore, idem Iulianus scripsit plerosque quidem putare non ualere donationem, et plerumque ita est: sed nonnullos casus posse existere, quibus sine reprehensione tutor auctor fit pupillo ad deminuendum, decreto scilicet interueniente: ueluti si matri aut sorori, quae aliter se tueri non possunt, tutor alimenta praestiterit: nam cum bonae fidei iudicium sit, nemo feret, inquit, aut pupillum aut substitutum eius querentes, quod tam coniunctae personae alitae sint: quin immo per contrarium putat posse cum tutore agi tutelae, si tale officium praetermiserit.
But even if the ward has made a donation not mortis causa with the authorization of the tutor, the same Julian wrote that most authorities indeed think the donation is invalid, and mostly this is the case; but some cases can exist in which, without blame, a tutor authorizes a ward to diminish his property, of course with a decree intervening: for example, if the tutor has provided maintenance for a mother or sister who cannot otherwise support themselves. For since this is an action of good faith, he says, no one will tolerate either the ward or his substitute complaining that such closely related persons were maintained; nay, on the contrary, he thinks that the action of guardianship can be brought against the tutor if he has neglected such a duty.
§27.3.1.3Officio tutoris incumbit etiam rationes actus sui conficere et pupillo reddere: ceterum si non fecit aut si factas non exhibet, hoc nomine iudicio tutelae tenebitur.
It also belongs to the duty of a tutor to draw up accounts of his administration and render them to the ward; but if he has not done so, or if he does not produce those that have been drawn up, he will be liable on this account under the action of guardianship.
de seruis quoque interrogationes, sed et quaestiones habendas et hoc officio iudicis conuenire placuit.
It has also been decided that interrogations of slaves, and indeed examinations under torture, should be held, and that this is consistent with the duty of the judge.
nam diuus Seuerus decreuit, cum neque inuentaria neque auctionalia proferentur, remedio eo uti debere, ut rationes a seruis qui rem gesserant proferantur: has rationes si esse mala fide conscriptas a seruis dicunt tutores, etiam in quaestionem serui interrogari poterunt.
For the deified Severus decreed that when neither inventories nor auction records are produced, recourse must be had to the remedy that accounts be produced by the slaves who managed the business; if the tutors say that these accounts were drawn up in bad faith by the slaves, the slaves may be interrogated even under torture.
§27.3.1.4Praeterea si matrem aluit pupilli tutor, putat Labeo imputare eum posse: sed est uerius non nisi perquam egenti dedit, imputare eum oportere de largis facultatibus pupilli: utrumque igitur concurrere oportet, ut et mater egena sit et filius in facultatibus positus.
Furthermore, if the tutor has maintained the mother of the ward, Labeo thinks that he can charge this; but it is more correct that he ought to charge it only if he gave it to one who was extremely needy, out of the abundant resources of the ward; therefore, both conditions must concur, namely, that the mother is needy and the son is in possession of resources.
§27.3.1.5Sed si munus nuptiale matri pupilli miserit, non eum pupillo imputaturum Labeo scripsit: nec perquam necessaria est ista muneratio.
But if he has sent a wedding gift to the mother of the ward, Labeo wrote that he shall not charge it to the ward; for that gift-giving is not extremely necessary.
§27.3.1.6Si pupillis tutores pater dedit, inter quos et libertum suum, perque eum uoluerit tutelam administrari, et tutores certam summam ei statuerunt, quia aliter se exhibere non poterat, habendam eius rationem quod statutum est Mela existimat.
If a father has given tutors to his wards, among whom was also his freedman, and wished the guardianship to be administered through him, and the tutors determined a certain sum for him because he could not otherwise support himself, Mela thinks that account must be taken of what was determined.
§27.3.1.7Ergo et si ex inquisitione propter rei notitiam fuerit datus tutor eique alimenta statuerint contutores, debebit eorum ratio haberi, quia iusta causa est praestandi.
Therefore, also if a tutor has been appointed upon inquiry because of his knowledge of the estate, and the co-tutors have determined maintenance for him, account must be taken of it, because there is a just cause for the provision.
§27.3.1.8Sed et si seruis cibaria praestiterit uel libertis, scilicet rei pupilli necessariis, dicendum est reputaturum: idemque et si liberis hominibus, si tamen ratio praestandi iusta intercedat.
But also if he has provided food to slaves or freedmen, that is, those necessary for the ward's estate, it must be said that he will charge it; and the same applies also to free men, provided that a just cause for the provision intervenes.
§27.3.1.9Item sumptus litis tutor reputabit et uiatica, si ex officio necesse habuit aliquo excurrere uel proficisci.
Likewise, a tutor shall charge the costs of litigation and travel expenses, if by reason of his duty he found it necessary to make an excursion or travel anywhere.
§27.3.1.10Nunc tractemus, si plures tutelam pupilli administrauerint, pro qua quisque eorum parte conueniendus sit.
Now let us discuss, if several persons have administered the guardianship of a ward, for what share each of them ought to be sued.