[PAULUS libro septuagensimo secundo ad edictum. ] §46.1.34.prHi, qui accessionis loco promittunt, in leuiorem causam accipi possunt, in deteriorem non possunt.
[PAULUS in the seventy-second book on the Edict.] Those who promise in the position of an accessory can be accepted for a lighter obligation, but cannot for a heavier one.
ideo, si a reo mihi stipulatus sim, a fideiussore mihi aut Titio, meliorem causam esse fideiussoris Iulianus putat, quia potest uel Titio soluere.
Therefore, if I have stipulated from the principal debtor payment to myself, and from the surety payment to myself or to Titius, Julian thinks that the condition of the surety is better, because he can pay even to Titius.
quod si a reo mihi aut Titio stipulatus, a fideiussore mihi tantum interrogem, in deteriorem causam acceptum fideiussorem Iulianus ait.
But if, having stipulated from the principal debtor payment to myself or to Titius, I should interrogate the surety only for payment to myself, Julian says that the surety has been accepted for a heavier obligation.
quid ergo, si a reo Stichum aut Pamphilum, a fideiussore Stichum interrogem? utrum in deteriorem causam acceptus est sublata electione? an in meliorem, quod et uerum est, quia mortuo eo liberari potest?
What then, if I interrogate the principal debtor for Stichus or Pamphilus, and the surety for Stichus? Has he been accepted for a heavier obligation, because the choice has been taken away? Or for a lighter one, which indeed is true, because if he dies, the surety can be freed?