[ULPIANUS libro quinquagensimo nono ad edictum. ] §42.4.7.11Plane interdum bona eius causa cognita uendenda erunt, si urgueat aes alienum et dilatio damnum sit allatura creditoribus, ita autem uendenda, ut quod supersit, furioso detur, quia hominis eius status et habitus a pupilli condicione non multum abhorret: quod quidem non est sine ratione.
[ULPIANUS book fifty-nine on the edict.] Clearly, sometimes his goods must be sold after an investigation of the case, if the debt is pressing and delay is going to bring damage to the creditors; but they are to be sold in such a way that what remains is given to the madman, because that person's status and condition do not differ much from the situation of a ward; and this indeed is not without reason.
§42.4.7.12Idemque et in prodigo dicendum est ceterisque, qui curatorum ope iuuantur: nec enim quisquam proprie latitare eos dixerit.
And the same must be said of a prodigal and others who are assisted by the aid of curators; for no one would say that they, strictly speaking, hide.
§42.4.7.13Illud sciendum est posse quem in eadem ciuitate esse et latitare, et in alia ciuitate et non latitare.
It must be known that someone can be in the same city and hide, and in another city and not hide.
etenim qui in alia ciuitate sit copiamque sui faciat in publico ibique pareat, an latitet, uideamus.
For let us see whether he who is in another city, and makes availability of himself in public and appears there, is hiding.
et hodie hoc iure utimur, ut siue quis eodem loci agat siue peregre agat, si tamen occursum creditoris euitet, latitare uideatur.
And today we apply this rule of law, that whether someone acts in the same place or acts abroad, if he nevertheless avoids meeting the creditor, he is deemed to hide.
denique eum quoque, qui in foro eodem agat, si circa columnas aut stationes se occultet, uideri latitare ueteres responderunt, et posse quem aduersus alterum latitare, aduersus alterum non.
Finally, the ancients answered that even he who acts in the same forum, if he conceals himself around the columns or stations, is deemed to hide, and that someone can hide against one person, but not against another.
constat autem, ut ipse eius possit bona uendere, aduersus quem latitat.
But it is well established that only he against whom there is hiding can sell his goods.
§42.4.7.14Si in diem uel sub condicione debitor latitet, antequam dies uel condicio ueniat, non possunt bona eius uenire: quid enim interest, debitor quis non sit an nondum conueniri possit? nam et si non sit debitor, idem dicemus.
If a debtor whose obligation is due on a certain day or under a condition hides, before the day comes or the condition is fulfilled, his goods cannot be sold; for what difference does it make whether someone is not a debtor or cannot yet be sued? For even if he is not a debtor, we shall say the same.
idem erit dicendum et si quis habeat quidem actionem, sed talem, quae per exceptionem repellitur.
The same must also be said if someone indeed has an action, but of such a kind that is repelled by an exception.
§42.4.7.15Si quis actione de peculio filii uel serui nomine conueniri possit, si latitet, eo iure utimur, ut possint bona eius possideri et uenire, tametsi nihil fuerit in peculio, quia esse potest et rei iudicatae tempus spectamus, utrum sit an non sit, et quod teneat actio, etiam si nihil in peculio fuerit.
If anyone can be sued by an action concerning the peculium in the name of a son or a slave, if he hides, we apply this rule of law, that his goods can be possessed and sold, even if there is nothing in the peculium, because there can be something in it later, and we look to the time of judgment to see whether there is any or not, and because the action is maintainable, even if there is nothing in the peculium.
§42.4.7.16Item uideamus, si quis aduersus in rem actionem latitet, an bona eius possideri uenumque dari possint.
Likewise, let us see, if anyone hides against an action in rem, whether his goods can be possessed and offered for sale.
extat Neratii sententia existimantis bona esse uendenda: et hoc rescripto Hadriani continetur, quo iure utimur.
There exists an opinion of Neratius who thinks that the goods must be sold; and this is contained in a rescript of Hadrian, which rule of law we apply.
§42.4.7.17Celsus autem Sexto respondit, si fundum, quem petere uolo, Titius possideat neque absens defendatur, commodius se existimare in fundi possessionem mittendum quam bona eius possideri.
But Celsus replied to Sextus that, if Titius possesses a land which I wish to claim, and being absent he is not defended, he thinks it is more suitable that the claimant be put into possession of the land rather than his goods be possessed.
hoc adnotandum est Celsum consultum non de latitante, sed de absente.
It must be noted here that Celsus was consulted not about a person hiding, but about an absent person.
§42.4.7.18Idem Celsus existimat, si is, a quo hereditatem petere uelim, latitat, commodissime fieri posse, ut in possessionem mittar rerum, quas pro herede uel pro possessore possidet: sed si dolo fecit, quo minus possideret, bona eius possidenda et uendenda sunt.
The same Celsus thinks that, if he from whom I wish to claim an inheritance hides, it can most conveniently be done that I be put into possession of the things which he possesses as heir or as possessor; but if he acted with fraud so that he would not possess them, his goods must be possessed and sold.
§42.4.7.19Diuus quoque Pius in persona eius, qui hereditatem possidens copiam sui non faciebat, rescripsit in possessionem rerum hereditariarum aduersarium inducendum: in quo rescripto et fructum percipere iussit eum, qui per nimiam contumaciam possessoris hereditatis, ut lucro eius cedat, in possessionem inductus est rerum hereditariarum.
The Divine Pius also, in the case of a person who, possessing an inheritance, did not make availability of himself, replied by rescript that the adversary must be led into possession of the hereditary things; in which rescript he also ordered that he who, because of the excessive contumacy of the possessor of the inheritance, was led into possession of the hereditary things, should perceive the fruits, so that it would yield to his profit.