[ULPIANUS libro sexto ad edictum. ] §3.2.13.prQuid ergo si non ducere sit passus, sed posteaquam duxit ratum habuerit? ut puta initio ignorauit talem esse, postea scit? non notabitur: praetor enim ad initium nuptiarum se rettulit. §3.2.13.1Si quis alieno nomine bina sponsalia constituerit, non notatur, nisi eius nomine constituat, quem quamue in potestate haberet: certe qui filium uel filiam constituere patitur, quodammodo ipse uidetur constituisse. §3.2.13.2Quod ait praetor 'eodem tempore', non initium sponsaliorum eodem tempore factum accipiendum est, sed si in idem tempus concurrant. §3.2.13.3Item si alteri sponsa, alteri nupta sit, ex sententia edicti punitur. §3.2.13.4Cum autem factum notetur, etiam si cum ea quis nuptias uel sponsalia constituat, quam uxorem ducere uel non potest uel fas non est, erit notatus. §3.2.13.5Ex compromisso arbiter infamiam non facit, quia non per omnia sententia est. §3.2.13.6Quantum ad infamiam pertinet, multum interest, in causa quae agebatur causa cognita aliquid pronuntiatum sit an quaedam extrinsecus sunt elocuta: nam ex his infamia non inrogatur. §3.2.13.7Poena grauior ultra legem imposita existimationem conseruat, ut et constitutum est et responsum.
[ULPIANUS, in his Sixth Book on the Edict.]\n\nWhat then if he did not permit him to marry her, but approved it after he married? As, for example, if at first he did not know she was such a person, but knew it afterwards? He shall not be marked with infamy; for the praetor referred to the beginning of the marriage.\n\nIf anyone contracts a double betrothal in another's name, he is not marked with infamy, unless he contracts it in the name of a male or female whom he has under his power; certainly, he who permits his son or daughter to contract a betrothal is, in a manner, deemed to have contracted it himself.\n\nWhere the praetor says "at the same time," this is not to be understood as meaning that the beginning of the betrothals occurred at the same time, but that they concur in the same period of time.\n\nLikewise, if a woman is betrothed to one person and married to another, she is punished according to the intent of the edict.\n\nSince, however, the act itself is marked, even if anyone contracts a marriage or a betrothal with a woman whom he either cannot marry or whom it is not lawful for him to marry, he will be marked with infamy.\n\nAn arbitrator under a compromise does not cause infamy, because his decision is not in all respects a judgment.\n\nAs far as infamy is concerned, it makes a great difference whether, in the case which was being tried, something was pronounced after a hearing of the case, or whether certain remarks were made extrinsically; for from the latter, infamy is not imposed.\n\nA heavier penalty imposed beyond the law preserves one's reputation, as has been both established and answered.
ut puta si eum, qui parte bonorum multari debuit, praeses relegauerit: dicendum erit duriori sententia cum eo transactum de existimatione eius idcircoque non esse infamem.
For example, if the governor has relegated a person who ought to have been fined a portion of his property, it must be said that by the more severe sentence a transaction was made regarding his reputation, and therefore he is not infamous.
sed si in causa furti nec manifesti in quadruplum iudex condemnauit, oneratum quidem reum poena aucta, nam ex furto non manifesto in duplum conueniri debuit: uerum hanc rem existimationem ei non conseruasse, quamuis si in poena non pecuniaria eum onerasset, transactum cum eo uidetur. §3.2.13.8Crimen stellionatus infamiam irrogat damnato, quamuis publicum non est iudicium.
But if, in an action for non-manifest theft, the judge condemned the defendant in fourfold damages, the defendant indeed was burdened by an increased penalty, for he ought to have been sued for double damages for non-manifest theft; yet this circumstance has not preserved his reputation, although if the judge had burdened him with a non-pecuniary penalty, a transaction would seem to have been made with him.\n\nThe crime of stellionate imposes infamy upon the person condemned, although the trial is not a public one.