[PAULUS libro quinto decimo quaestionum. ] §45.1.132.prQuidam cum filium alienum susciperet, tradenti promiserat certam pecuniae quantitatem, si eum aliter quam ut filium obseruasset.
[PAULUS, Questions, book 15.] When a certain person received another's son, he had promised the transferor a certain sum of money "if he should treat him otherwise than as a son." I ask whether, if he should subsequently expel him from his house or, dying, leave him nothing in his will, the stipulation is forfeited, and what difference it makes whether he was the son, or an alumnus, or a kinsman of the person bringing the action.
quaero, si postmodum domo eum propulerit uel moriens nihil ei testamento reliquerit, an stipulatio committetur, et quid intersit, utrum filius an alumnus uel cognatus agentis fuerit. praeterea quaero, si filium suum quis legitime in adoptionem dederit et ita, ut supra scriptum est, stipulatio intercesserit eumque pater adoptiuus exheredauerit uel emancipauerit, an stipulatio committatur.
Furthermore, I ask whether, if someone has lawfully given his own son in adoption and a stipulation has intervened as written above, and the adoptive father has disinherited or emancipated him, the stipulation is forfeited.
respondi: stipulatio utilis est in utroque casu: igitur, si contra conuentionem factum sit, committetur stipulatio.
I answered: the stipulation is useful in both cases; therefore, if something is done contrary to the agreement, the stipulation will be forfeited.
sed uideamus primum in eo, qui legitime adoptauit, an possit committi, si eum exheredauerit uel emancipauerit: haec enim pater circa filium solet facere: igitur non aliter eum quam ut filium obseruauit.
But let us first see, in the case of the one who lawfully adopted, whether it can be forfeited if he has disinherited or emancipated him; for these are things a father is accustomed to do regarding his son; therefore, he did not treat him otherwise than as a son.
ergo exheredatus de inofficioso agat.
Consequently, the disinherited son should bring the complaint of an undutiful will.
quid ergo dicemus, si et meruit exheredari? emancipatus plane et hoc remedio carebit.
What then shall we say if he also deserved to be disinherited? The emancipated son will clearly lack even this remedy.
quare sic debuit interponi stipulatio, ut, si eum emancipasset uel exheredasset, certum quid promitteret.
Therefore, the stipulation ought to have been interposed in such a way that, if he should emancipate or disinherit him, he would promise a certain thing.
quo tamen casu commissa stipulatione potest quaeri, an exheredato permittendum esset dicere de inofficioso? maxime, si patri naturali heres extitisset, an uicto deneganda est ex stipulatu actio? sed si ei, qui stipulatus est, non debuit denegari uicto filio, nec ipsi deneganda erit debitae pecuniae exsecutio.
However, in that case, when the stipulation is forfeited, it can be asked whether the disinherited son should be permitted to complain of an undutiful will? Especially, if he had become the heir to his natural father, should the action on the stipulation be denied to him if he is defeated? But if it ought not to be denied to the person who stipulated, even though the son was defeated, the enforcement of the owed money must not be denied to him either.
in eo autem, qui non adoptauit, quem intellectum habeat haec conceptio 'si eum aliter quam ut filium obseruasset', non prospicio: an et hic exigimus exheredationem uel emancipationem, res in extraneo ineptas? sed si is, qui legitime adoptauit, nihil facit contra uerba stipulationis, cum utitur patrio iure in eo, qui haec non fecit, dicit superuacuo: dici tamen poterit commissam esse stipulationem.
On the other hand, in the case of the one who did not adopt, I do not foresee what meaning this formulation "if he should treat him otherwise than as a son" has; do we here also require disinheritance or emancipation, things which are absurd in the case of a stranger? But if he who lawfully adopted does nothing contrary to the words of the stipulation when he uses his paternal right, in the case of the one who did not do this, it is said in vain; nevertheless, it can be said that the stipulation is forfeited.
§45.1.132.1Filius familias ita stipulatus est: 'quantam pecuniam Titio credidero, fide tua esse iubes?' et emancipatus credidit: patri non debebit fideiussor, quia nec reus ei tenetur.
A son-in-power stipulated thus: "Do you guarantee on your credit whatever money I shall lend to Titius?" and, having been emancipated, he lent the money. The guarantor will not be liable to the father, because the principal debtor is not liable to him either.