Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §46.3.67.pr

Subsequent Ownership of Goods and Repeated Coin Transfers

Passage 7722 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

This section discusses the release of a debt by acquiring ownership of a previously delivered slave belonging to another, and the validity of Servius's opinion on extinguishing a larger debt by repeatedly circulating a small number of coins.

[MARCELLUS libro tertio decimo digestorum. ] §46.3.67.prSi quis duos homines promiserit et Stichum soluerit, poterit eiusdem Stichi dominium postea consecutus dando liberari.
[MARCELLUS, in his thirteenth book of the Digests.] If anyone has promised two slaves and has delivered Stichus [who belongs to another], he can, having subsequently acquired ownership of the same Stichus, be released by giving him.
in nummis minor uel prope nulla dubitatio est: nam et apud Alfenum Seruius eum, qui minus a debitore suo accipere et liberare eum uellet, respondit posse saepius aliquos nummos accipiendo ab eo eique retro dando ac rursus accipiendo id efficere: ueluti, si centum debitorem decem acceptis liberare creditor uelit, ut, cum decem acceperit, eadem ei retro reddat, mox ab eo accipiat ac nouissime retineat: etsi in dubitationem a quibusdam hoc male deducatur, quod non possit uideri is qui ita accepit, ut ei a quo accepit retro reddat, soluisse potius quam decessisse.
In the case of coins, there is less or almost no doubt: for also, in Alfenus, Servius responded that a creditor who wished to accept less from his debtor and release him could accomplish this by repeatedly accepting some coins from him, giving them back to him, and accepting them again: as for example, if a creditor wishes to release a debtor of a hundred by accepting ten, so that, when he has accepted ten, he returns the same to him, presently accepts them from him, and finally retains them: even though this is wrongly brought into doubt by some, on the ground that he who accepted [the coins] in such a way as to return them to the one from whom he accepted them, cannot be seen to have paid (or released) rather than to have departed [from the transaction/claim].

Notes

  1. §46.3.67.prduos homines promiserit et Stichum soluerit — This refers to a case where a debtor agreed (e.g., by stipulation) to deliver two slaves and delivered Stichus, a slave belonging to another. In Roman law, for a delivery (solutio) to be valid, ownership must be transferred (dare). Thus, delivering another's slave does not initially extinguish the debt, but once the debtor subsequently acquires ownership and "gives" (dando, transferring ownership) him, the performance becomes valid.
  2. §46.3.67.pris qui ita accepit ... soluisse potius quam decessisse — There are two interpretations of 'is qui ita accepit' ("he who accepted in this way"). (1) Taking it as the debtor: referring to the debtor who receives the returned coins to pay them again; here 'soluisse' means "to have paid" and 'decessisse' means "to have departed/withdrawn [from a real act of payment]". (2) Taking it as the creditor: referring to the creditor who accepts the coins and immediately returns them; here 'soluisse' means "to have released/discharged [the debt]" and 'decessisse' means "to have departed [from his claim, i.e., remitted it gratuitously]". In either case, the focus of the debate is whether circulating 10 coins to pay 100 constitutes a valid "performance (solutio)" rather than an unsubstantial remission of debt.

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §46.3.67.pr. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:46.3.67.pr

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.