[PAULUS libro quinto decimo responsorum. ] §40.12.38.prPaulus respondit, si, ut proponitur, post perfectam sine ulla condicione emptionem postea emptor ex uoluntate sua litteras emisit, quibus profiteretur se post certum tempus manumissurum eum quem emerat, non uideri eas litteras ad constitutionem diui Marci pertinere.
[PAULUS, in the fifteenth book of Opinions.] Paulus answered that if, as is proposed, after a sale has been completed without any condition, the buyer subsequently of his own free will issued letters in which he declared that he would manumit after a certain time the person whom he had bought, those letters do not seem to pertain to the constitution of the divine Marcus.
§40.12.38.1Idem respondit constitutionem quidem diui Marci ad libertatem eorum mancipiorum pertinere, quae hac lege uenierint, ut post tempus manumitterentur: sed eundem fauorem libertatis consequendae causa etiam eam mereri, pro qua dominus pretium accepit, ut ancillam suam manumitteret, cum idem etiam libertam habiturus sit.
He also answered that the constitution of the divine Marcus indeed pertains to the freedom of those slaves who have been sold under the condition that they should be manumitted after a certain time; but that, for the sake of obtaining freedom, the same favor is also deserved by her for whom the master received a price in order to manumit his female slave, since the same person will also have her as a freedwoman.
§40.12.38.2Quaesitum est, an emptor seruo recte libertatem dederit nondum pretio soluto.
The question was asked whether a buyer has rightly given freedom to a slave when the price was not yet paid.
Paulus respondit seruum, quem uenditor emptori tradidit, si ei pro pretio satisfactum est, et nondum pretio soluto in bonis emptoris esse coepisse.
Paulus answered that a slave whom the seller has delivered to the buyer, if satisfaction has been given for the price, has begun to be among the property of the buyer even though the price has not yet been paid.
§40.12.38.3Gaius Seius Stichum seruum Lucio Titio uendidit ita, ut Titius Stichum post triennium manumitteret, si continuo triennio seruisset: sed nondum exacto tempore trienni Stichus fugit et post aliquantum temporis defuncto Titio reuertit: quaero, an obstet Sticho ad consequendam ex uenditione libertatem, quod ante triennium discesserit.
Gaius Seius sold the slave Stichus to Lucius Titius on the condition that Titius should manumit Stichus after three years if he had served for three continuous years; but before the three-year period had expired, Stichus fled, and after some time, Titius having died, he returned. I ask whether the fact that he departed before the three years stands in the way of Stichus obtaining the freedom resulting from the sale.
Paulus respondit secundum ea quae proponuntur expleto tempore, post quod Stichus manumitti debuit, libertatem ei competisse.
Paulus answered that, according to the facts proposed, once the time had expired after which Stichus ought to have been manumitted, the freedom belonged to him.