[ULPIANUS libro undecimo ad edictum. ] §4.4.11.prUerum uel de dolo uel utilis actio erit in id quod minoris interfuit non manumitti: proinde quidquid hic haberet, si non manumisisset, id ei nunc praestabitur.
[ULPIANUS in the eleventh book on the Edict.] But there will be either an action on fraud or an equitable action for the interest of the minor that the slave should not have been manumitted; accordingly, whatever he would have had here, if he had not manumitted, that will now be made good to him.
sed et nomine earum rerum, quas dominicas seruus manumissus supprimebat, competunt aduersus eum actiones ad exhibendum et furti et condictio, uidelicet quoniam et manumissus eas contrectabat.
But also on account of those things, belonging to the master, which the manumitted slave was withholding, actions for production and for theft and a condictio lie against him, namely because even when manumitted he was handling them.
ceterum ex delicto in seruitutem facto domino aduersus eum post libertatem actio non competit: et hoc rescripto diui Seueri continetur.
Otherwise, for a delict committed during servitude, an action does not lie for the master against him after his freedom; and this is contained in a rescript of the divine Severus.
§4.4.11.1Quid si minor uiginti quinque annis, maior uiginti hac lege uendiderit, ut manumittatur? ideo proposui maiorem uiginti, quoniam et Scaeuola scribit libro quarto decimo quaestionum et magis est, ut sententia constitutionis diui Marci ad Aufidium Uictorinum hunc, id est minorem uiginti annis non complectatur.
What if a minor under twenty-five years, but older than twenty, sold a slave on this condition, that he be manumitted? I suggested "older than twenty" because Scaevola also writes in the fourteenth book of Questions, and it is more correct, that the opinion of the constitution of the divine Marcus to Aufidius Victorinus does not include this person, that is, one under twenty years of age.
quare uidendum, an maiori uiginti annis subueniatur: et si quidem ante desideret, quam libertas competat, audietur: sin uero postea, non possit.
Therefore, we must see whether relief is given to one older than twenty years: and if indeed he requests it before freedom is acquired, he will be heard; but if afterwards, he cannot.
item quaeri potest, si is qui emit hac lege minor sit, an restitui possit.
Likewise, it can be asked, if the one who bought the slave under this condition is a minor, whether he can be restored.
et si quidem nondum libertas competit, erit dicendum posse ei subueniri: sin uero posteaquam dies uenit, uoluntas maioris uenditoris libertatem imponit.
And if indeed freedom is not yet acquired, it must be said that relief can be given to him; but if after the day has come, the will of the older seller imposes freedom.
§4.4.11.2Ex facto quaesitum est: adulescentes quidam acceperant curatorem Saluianum quendam nomine: hic cum curam administrasset, beneficio principis urbicam procurationem erat adeptus et apud praetorem se a cura adulescentium excusauerat absentibus eis: adulescentes adierant praetorem desiderantes in integrum aduersus eum restitui, quod esset contra constitutiones excusatus.
A question arose from a factual case: certain youths had received a curator, one Salvianus by name. When he had administered his curatorship, by the favor of the emperor he had obtained a city procuratorship and had excused himself from the care of the youths before the praetor in their absence. The youths had gone to the praetor, desiring to be restored to their original state against him, because he had been excused contrary to the constitutions.
cum enim susceptam tutelam non alii soleant deponere, quam qui trans mare rei publicae causa absunt uel hi qui circa principem sunt occupati, ut in consiliarii Menandri Arrii persona est indultum, meruisset autem Saluianus excusationem, adulescentes quasi capti in integrum restituti a praetore desiderauerant.
For since those who have undertaken a guardianship are not accustomed to lay it down, except those who are absent across the sea on account of the state, or those who are occupied around the emperor, as was granted in the person of the counselor Menander Arrius, but Salvianus had obtained an excuse, the youths, as if defrauded, had desired from the praetor to be restored to their original state.
Aetrius Seuerus quia dubitabat, ad imperatorem Seuerum rettulit: ad quam consultationem successori eius Uenidio Quieto rescripsit nullas partes esse praetoris: neque enim contractum proponi cum minore annis uiginti quinque: sed principes interuenire et reducere hunc ad administrationem, qui perperam esset a praetore excusatus.
Aetrius Severus, because he was in doubt, referred it to the Emperor Severus. To this consultation, he wrote back to his successor, Venidius Quietus, that the praetor had no part in this: for no contract was set forth with a minor under twenty-five years of age; but that the emperors intervene and bring back to administration him who had been wrongly excused by the praetor.
§4.4.11.3Sciendum est autem non passim minoribus subueniri, sed causa cognita, si capti esse proponantur.
But it must be known that relief is not granted to minors everywhere, but only after cause shown, if they are shown to have been defrauded.
§4.4.11.4Item non restituetur, qui sobrie rem suam administrans occasione damni non inconsulte accidentis, sed fato uelit restitui: nec enim euentus damni restitutionem indulget, sed inconsulta facilitas.
Likewise, he will not be restored, who, administering his property prudently, wishes to be restored on the occasion of a loss occurring not through imprudence, but by fate; for it is not the outcome of loss that allows restoration, but imprudent ease.
et ita et Pomponius libro uicensimo octauo scripsit.
And so Pomponius also wrote in the twenty-eighth book.
unde Marcellus apud Iulianum notat, si minor sibi seruum necessarium comparauerit, mox decesserit, non debere eum restitui: neque enim captus est emendo sibi rem pernecessariam, licet mortalem.
Hence Marcellus notes on Julian: if a minor bought a necessary slave for himself, and he died soon after, he ought not to be restored; for he was not defrauded in buying a highly necessary thing for himself, even though it was mortal.
§4.4.11.5Si locupleti heres extitit et subito hereditas lapsa sit (puta praedia fuerunt quae chasmate perierunt, insulae exustae sunt, serui fugerunt aut decesserunt): Iulianus quidem libro quadragensimo sexto sic loquitur, quasi possit minor in integrum restitui.
If he became heir to a wealthy person, and suddenly the inheritance fell (for instance, there were estates which perished in a chasm, apartments were burned down, slaves fled or died): Julian indeed speaks in the forty-sixth book as if the minor could be restored in integrum.
Marcellus autem apud Iulianum notat cessare in integrum restitutionem: neque enim aetatis lubrico captus est adeundo locupletam hereditatem, et quod fato contingit, cuiuis patri familias quamuis diligentissimo possit contingere.
Marcellus, however, notes on Julian that in integrum restitutio does not apply: for he was not defrauded by the slipperiness of age in entering upon a wealthy inheritance, and what happens by fate could happen to any head of a family, however diligent.
sed haec res adferre potest restitutionem minori, si adiit hereditatem, in qua erant multae mortales uel praedia urbana, aes autem alienum graue, quod non prospexit posse euenire, ut demoriantur mancipia, praedia ruant, uel quod non cito distraxerit haec, quae multis casibus obnoxia sunt.
But this matter can bring restoration to a minor, if he entered an inheritance in which there were many mortal things or urban estates, but a heavy debt, which he did not foresee could happen, such as that slaves would die, estates collapse, or because he did not quickly sell off these things, which are subject to many casualties.
§4.4.11.6Item quaeritur, si minor aduersus minorem restitui desiderat, an sit audiendus.
Likewise, it is asked, if a minor desires to be restored against a minor, whether he is to be heard.
et Pomponius simpliciter scribit non restituendum.
And Pomponius simply writes that he is not to be restored.
puto autem inspiciendum a praetore, quis captus sit: proinde si ambo capti sunt, uerbi gratia minor minori pecuniam dedit et ille perdidit, melior est causa secundum Pomponium eius, qui accepit et uel dilapidauit uel perdidit.
But I think it must be examined by the praetor who was defrauded: accordingly, if both were defrauded, for example, a minor gave money to a minor and the latter lost it, the case of the one who received it and either squandered or lost it is better, according to Pomponius.
§4.4.11.7Plane si minor annis cum filio familias maiore contraxerit, et Iulianus libro quarto digestorum et Marcellus libro secundo digestorum scribit posse in integrum restitui, ut magis aetatis ratio quam senatus consulti habeatur.
Clearly, if a minor under age contracted with a filius familias who is a major, both Julian in the fourth book of the Digests and Marcellus in the second book of the Digests write that he can be restored in integrum, so that consideration of age is held of more account than the senate's decree.