[ULPIANUS libro quinquagesimo quinto ad edictum. ] §39.4.1.prPraetor ait: 'Quod publicanus eius publici nomine ui ademerit quodue familia publicanorum, si id restitutum non erit, in duplum aut, si post annum agetur, in simplum iudicium dabo.
[ULPIAN in the fifty-fifth book on the Edict.] The praetor says: 'What a tax-collector has taken by force in the name of that public tax, or what the household of tax-collectors [has taken], if it is not restored, I will grant an action for double the value, or, if the action is brought after a year, for the single value.
item si damnum iniuria furtumue factum esse dicetur, iudicium dabo.
Likewise, if it is alleged that damage has been unlawfully caused or theft committed, I will grant an action.
si id ad quos ea res pertinebit non exhibebitur, in dominos sine noxae deditione indicium dabo'. §39.4.1.1Hic titulus ad publicanos pertinet.
If those persons are not produced by those to whom they belong, I will grant an action against their masters without the option of noxal surrender.' This title pertains to tax-collectors.
publicani autem sunt, qui publico fruuntur (nam inde nomen habent), siue fisco uectigal pendant uel tributum consequantur: et omnes, qui quod a fisco conducunt, recte appellantur publicani.
Now, tax-collectors are those who enjoy a public interest (for they derive their name from this), whether they pay tax to the treasury or collect tribute; and all who lease anything from the treasury are rightly called tax-collectors.
§39.4.1.2Dixerit aliquis: quid utique hoc edictum propositum est, quasi non et alibi praetor prouiderit furtis damnis ui raptis? sed e re putauit et specialiter aduersus publicanos edictum proponere.
Someone might say: why was this edict proposed at all, as if the praetor had not provided elsewhere for thefts, damages, and things taken by force? But he thought it expedient to propose an edict specifically against tax-collectors as well.
§39.4.1.3Quod quidem edictum in aliqua parte mitius est, quippe cum in duplum datur, cum ui bonorum raptorum in quadruplum sit et furti manifesti aeque in quadruplum, §39.4.1.4et restituendi facultas publicano ui abreptum datur, quod si fecerit, omni onere exuitur et poenali actione ex hac parte edicti liberatur.
Indeed, this edict is in some part more lenient, since an action is granted for double the value, whereas for things taken by force it is for fourfold, and for manifest theft it is likewise for fourfold, and the opportunity of restoring what was taken by force is given to the tax-collector, which if he does, he is stripped of all burden and freed from the penal action under this part of the edict.
unde quaeritur, si quis uelit cum publicano non ex hoc edicto, sed ex generali ui bonorum raptorum, damni iniuriae uel furti agere, an possit? et placet posse, idque Pomponius quoque scribit: est enim absurdum meliorem esse publicanorum causam quam ceterorum effectam opinari.
Hence the question is asked: if someone wishes to sue a tax-collector not under this edict, but under the general actions for things taken by force, for unlawful damage, or for theft, is he able to do so? And it is agreed that he can, and Pomponius also writes this; for it is absurd to think that the position of tax-collectors was made better than that of all other persons.
§39.4.1.5Familiae nomen hic non tantum ad seruos publicanorum referemus, uerum et qui in numero familiarum sunt publicani, siue igitur liberi sint siue serui alieni, qui publicanis in eo uectigali ministrant, hoc edicto continebuntur.
Here we shall refer the name "household" not only to the slaves of tax-collectors, but also to those who are in the number of the households of the tax-collector; whether, therefore, they are free persons or the slaves of others, who assist the tax-collectors in that tax, they will be included in this edict.
proinde et si seruus publicani rapuit, non tamen in ea familia constitutus, quae publico uectigali ministrat, hoc edictum cessabit.
Accordingly, even if a slave of a tax-collector has committed a robbery, but was not established in that household which assists in the public tax, this edict will not apply.
§39.4.1.6Quod nouissime praetor ait 'si hi non exhibebuntur, in dominos sine noxae deditione iudicium dabo', hoc proprium est huius edicti, quod, si non exhibeantur serui, competit iudicium sine noxae deditione, siue habeant eos in potestate siue non, siue possint exhibere siue non possint.
What the praetor says lastly, 'if these are not produced, I will grant an action against the masters without noxal surrender', is peculiar to this edict, because, if the slaves are not produced, an action without noxal surrender is competent, whether they have them in their power or not, and whether they can produce them or cannot.