[IDEM libro octogensimo primo ad edictum. ] §39.2.24.prFluminum publicorum communis est usus, sicuti uiarum publicarum et litorum.
[THE SAME, on the Edict, book eighty-one.] The use of public rivers is common, just as that of public roads and shores.
in his igitur publice licet cuilibet aedificare et destruere, dum tamen hoc sine incommodo cuiusquam fiat.
Therefore in these places it is publicly allowed for anyone to build and demolish, provided however that this is done without inconvenience to anyone.
propter quod operis dumtaxat nomine cum satisdatione cauetur, de uitio loci nihil cauetur, hoc est operis, quod quis facit.
Wherefore, security with guarantors is given on account of the work only, and nothing is secured concerning a defect of the place, that is, of the work which someone does.
ceterum si ex loci uitio damnum timeatur, minime dicendum est damni infecti stipulationem interponi oportere: quis enim dubitat neminem esse, a quo stipuletur, cum nemine nihil faciente locus ipse publicus damnum inferat sui natura?
But if damage is feared from a defect of the place, it must by no means be said that a stipulation for threatened damage ought to be entered into: for who doubts that there is no one from whom a stipulation can be made, when, with no one doing anything, the public place itself inflicts damage by its own nature?
§39.2.24.1Ad ea igitur opera stipulatio pertinet, quaecumque priuatim fiant.
Therefore, the stipulation relates to those works, whichever are done privately.
quid ergo, si publice opus fiat, de uitio eius quid faciemus? et plane uel princeps adeundus est uel, si in prouincia fiat, praeses prouinciae.
What then, if a work is done publicly, what shall we do concerning its defect? And clearly, either the Emperor must be approached, or, if it is done in a province, the governor of the province.
sed quod dictum est 'operis uitio' sic accipiendum est, etiam si proponas non tantum tempore, quo opus fit, sed etiam si postea contingat: quid enim si ideo, quia male aedificatum erat, corruit?
But what was said as "by a defect of the work" is to be understood thus, even if you assume [that the damage occurs] not only at the time when the work is being done, but also if it happens afterwards: for what if it collapses for the reason that it was badly built?
§39.2.24.1aAdicitur in hac stipulatione et heredum nomen uel successorum eorumque, ad quos ea res pertinet.
In this stipulation, the name of heirs or successors is also added, and of those to whom the matter belongs.
successores autem non solum qui in uniuersa bona succedunt, sed et hi, qui in rei tantum dominium successerint, his uerbis continentur.
But successors are contained in these words, not only those who succeed to the whole estate, but also those who have succeeded to the ownership of the thing only.
§39.2.24.2Sed ut ne quid aedium loci operisue uitio damnum factum sit, stipulatio interponitur de eo sine satisdatione: quae non solum ad totas aedes, sed etiam ad partem aedium pertinet.
But so that no damage is done by a defect of the building, place, or work, a stipulation is entered into concerning this without security with guarantors: which relates not only to the whole building, but also to a part of the building.
uitium autem aedium et loci esse Labeo ait, quod accidens extrinsecus infirmiores eas facit: denique nemo dixit palustris loci uel harenosi nomine quasi uitiosi committi stipulationem, quia naturale uitium est: et ideo nec ea stipulatio interponitur neque interposita committetur.
But Labeo says that a defect of the building and the place is that which, happening from without, makes them weaker: finally, no one has said that the stipulation is forfeited on account of a marshy or sandy place as if it were defective, because it is a natural defect: and therefore neither is that stipulation entered into, nor, if entered into, will it be forfeited.
§39.2.24.3Haec stipulatio utrum id solum damnum contineat, quod iniuria fit, an uero omne damnum, quod extrinsecus contingat? et Labeo quidem scribit de damno dato non posse agi, si quid forte terrae motu aut ui fluminis alioue quo casu fortuito acciderit.
Does this stipulation contain only that damage which is done unlawfully, or indeed all damage which happens from without? And indeed Labeo writes that an action cannot be brought for damage done, if something happens by chance by an earthquake or the force of a river or any other fortuitous event.
§39.2.24.4Seruius quoque putat, si ex aedibus promissoris uento tegulae deiectae damnum uicino dederint, ita eum teneri, si aedificii uitio id acciderit, non si uiolentia uentorum uel qua alia ratione, quae uim habet diuinam.
Servius also thinks that if tiles thrown down from the promisor's building by the wind give damage to a neighbor, he is liable only if it happened by a defect of the building, not if by the violence of the winds or some other reason which has divine force.
Labeo et rationem adicit, quo, si hoc non admittatur, iniquum erit: quo enim tam firmum aedificium est, ut fluminis aut maris aut tempestatis aut ruinae incendii aut terrae motus uim sustinere possit?
Labeo also adds the reason, by which, if this is not admitted, it will be unjust: for what building is so strong that it can withstand the force of a river or the sea or a storm or the collapse of a fire or an earthquake?