[ULPIANUS libro trigensimo septimo ad edictum. ] §47.2.52.16Iulianus libro uicensimo secundo digestorum scripsit, si pecuniam quis a me acceperit, ut creditori meo soluat, deinde, cum tantam pecuniam eidem creditori deberet, suo nomine soluerit, furtum eum facere.
Julian wrote in the twenty-second book of the Digests that if anyone should receive money from me in order to pay it to my creditor, and then, because he owed the same amount of money to that same creditor, paid it in his own name, he commits a theft.
§47.2.52.17Si Titius alienam rem uendidit et ab emptore accepit nummos, non uidetur nummorum furtum fecisse.
If Titius has sold another's property and received coins from the buyer, he is not deemed to have committed a theft of the coins.
§47.2.52.18Si ex duobus sociis omnium bonorum unus rem pignori acceperit eaque subrepta sit, Mela scripsit eum solum furti habere actionem, qui pignori accepit, socium non habere.
Mela wrote that if one of two partners in all goods has received a thing in pledge and it has been stolen, only he who received it in pledge has the action for theft, and the partner does not.
§47.2.52.19Neque uerbo neque scriptura quis furtum facit: hoc enim iure utimur, ut furtum sine contrectatione non fiat.
No one commits a theft either by word or by writing; for we employ this rule of law, that a theft does not occur without physical handling.
quare et opem ferre uel consilium dare tunc nocet, cum secuta contrectatio est.
Therefore, providing assistance or giving counsel is harmful only when physical handling has followed.
§47.2.52.20Si quis asinum meum coegisset et in equas suas τὰς γονὰς dumtaxat χάριν admisisset, furti non tenetur, nisi furandi quoque animum habuit.
If anyone has driven my ass and let him cover his mares merely for the sake of breeding, he is not held liable for theft, unless he also had the intention of stealing.
quod et Herennio Modestino studioso meo de Dalmatia consulenti rescripsi circa equos, quibus eiusdem rei gratia subiecisse quis equas suas proponebatur, furti ita demum teneri, si furandi animo id fecisset, si minus, in factum agendum.
I wrote this in reply also to my keen student Herennius Modestinus when he consulted me from Dalmatia regarding horses, where someone was proposed to have subjected his mares to them for the sake of the same thing: that he is held liable for theft only if he had done so with the intention of stealing, but if not, an action on the facts must be brought.
§47.2.52.21Cum Titio honesto uiro pecuniam credere uellem, subiecisti mihi alium Titium egenum, quasi ille esset locuples, et nummos acceptos cum eo diuisisti: furti tenearis, quasi ope tua consilioque furtum factum sit: sed et Titius furti tenebitur.
When I wished to lend money to Titius, a respectable man, you substituted for me another Titius, a needy man, as if he were wealthy, and you divided the received money with him: you should be held liable for theft, as if the theft had been committed by your assistance and counsel; but Titius also will be held liable for theft.
§47.2.52.22Maiora quis pondera tibi commodauit, cum emeres ad pondus: furti eum uenditori teneri Mela scribit: te quoque, si scisti: nam non ex uoluntate uenditoris accipis, cum erret in pondere.
Someone lent you heavier weights when you were buying by weight: Mela writes that he is held liable to the seller for theft; and you too, if you knew it; for you do not receive it with the consent of the seller, since he is mistaken as to the weight.
§47.2.52.23Si quis seruo meo persuaserit, ut nomen suum ex instrumento puta emptionis tolleret, et Mela scripsit et ego puto furti agendum.
If anyone has persuaded my slave to remove his name from a document, say, of purchase, both Mela wrote and I think that an action for theft must be brought.
§47.2.52.24Sed si seruo persuasum sit, ut tabulas meas describeret, puto, si quidem seruo persuasum sit, serui corrupti agendum, si ipse fecit, de dolo actionem dandam.
But if a slave has been persuaded to copy my account books, I think that, if indeed the slave was persuaded, an action for corrupting a slave must be brought; but if he did it himself, an action for fraud must be granted.
§47.2.52.25Si linea margaritarum subrepta sit, dicendus est numerus.
If a string of pearls has been stolen, the number must be stated.
sed et si de uino furti agatur, necesse est dici, quot amphorae subreptae sint.
But also, if an action for theft is brought concerning wine, it is necessary to state how many amphorae were stolen.
si uasa subrepta sint, numerus erit dicendus.
If vessels have been stolen, the number will have to be stated.
§47.2.52.26Si seruus meus, qui habebat peculii administrationem liberam, pactus sit cum eo non donationis causa, qui rem eius peculiarem subripuerat, recte transactum uidetur: quamuis enim domino quaeratur furti actio, attamen in peculio serui est.
If my slave, who had the free administration of his peculium, has made a compromise, not for the purpose of a donation, with the person who had stolen a thing belonging to his peculium, the transaction is deemed valid; for although the action for theft is acquired for the master, nevertheless it is in the slave's peculium.
sed et si tota poena furti dupli seruo soluta sit, non dubie fur liberabitur.
But also, if the entire double penalty for theft has been paid to the slave, the thief will undoubtedly be discharged.
cui consequens est, ut, si forte a fure acceperit seruus, quod ei rei satis esse uideatur, similiter recte transactum uideatur.
Consequently, if the slave should happen to receive from the thief what seems to be sufficient for that matter, the compromise is similarly deemed valid.
§47.2.52.27Si quis iurauerit se furtum non fecisse, deinde rem furtiuam contrectet, furti quidem actio peremitur, rei tamen persecutio domino seruatur.
If anyone has sworn that he did not commit a theft, and then handles the stolen thing, the action for theft is indeed extinguished, but the pursuit of the thing is nevertheless preserved for the owner.
§47.2.52.28Si seruus subreptus heres institutus fuerit, furti iudicio actor consequetur etiam pretium hereditatis, si modo seruus, antequam iussu domini adeat, mortuus fuerit.
If a stolen slave has been instituted as heir, the plaintiff will in the action for theft obtain also the value of the inheritance, provided that the slave died before he entered upon it by the order of his master.
condicendo quoque mortuum idem consequetur.
By bringing a condictio for the deceased slave, he will obtain the same.
§47.2.52.29Si statuliber subreptus sit uel res sub condicione legata, deinde, antequam adeatur, extiterit condicio, furti iam agi non potest, quia desiit interesse heredis: pendente autem condicione tanti aestimandus est, quanti emptorem potest inuenire.
If a statuliber has been stolen or a thing bequeathed under a condition, and then, before the inheritance is entered, the condition is fulfilled, an action for theft can no longer be brought, because the heir has ceased to have an interest. But while the condition is pending, he must be valued at as much as he can find a buyer for.