Humanitext Reader

Justinian I · The Digest of Justinian §47.2.55.pr-47.2.55.5

Theft by Unauthorized Use and the Killing of Thieves

Passage 7917 of 9271 · Latin

Summary

An excerpt from Gaius's thirteenth book on the Provincial Edict. It discusses when the unauthorized use or sub-lending of property constitutes theft, the lawful killing of a daytime thief under the Twelve Tables, the concurrent nature of penal actions and recovery actions, complicity in theft, and the effect of a settlement by a guardian.

[GAIUS libro tertio decimo ad edictum prouinciale. ] §47.2.55.prSi pignore creditor utatur, furti tenetur.
[GAIUS in the thirteenth book on the Provincial Edict.] If a creditor uses a pledge, he is liable for theft.
§47.2.55.1Eum, qui quod utendum accepit ipse alii commodauerit, furti obligari responsum est.
It was answered that he who himself lent to another what he received to use is liable for theft.
ex quo satis apparet furtum fieri et si quis usum alienae rei in suum lucrum conuertat.
From which it sufficiently appears that theft is committed also if someone converts the use of another's property to his own gain.
nec mouere quem debet, quasi nihil lucri sui gratia faciat: species enim lucri est ex alieno largiri et beneficii debitorem sibi adquirere.
And it ought not to disturb anyone, as if he does nothing for the sake of his own gain: for it is a species of gain to bestow bounty from another's property and to acquire for oneself a debtor of a favor.
unde et is furti tenetur, qui ideo rem amouet, ut eam alii donet.
Whence also he is liable for theft who removes a thing for the purpose of giving it to another.
§47.2.55.2Furem interdiu deprehensum non aliter occidere lex duodecim tabularum permisit, quam si telo se defendat.
The Law of the Twelve Tables did not permit killing a thief caught by day, unless he defends himself with a weapon.
teli autem appellatione et ferrum et fustis et lapis et denique omne, quod nocendi causa habetur, significatur.
Moreover, by the designation of 'weapon', there is meant iron, a club, a stone, and in short everything that is kept for the purpose of doing harm.
§47.2.55.3Cum furti actio ad poenae persecutionem pertineat, condictio uero et uindicatio ad rei reciperationem, apparet recepta re nihilo minus saluam esse furti actionem, uindicationem uero et condictionem tolli: sicut ex diuerso post solutam dupli aut quadrupli poenam salua est uindicatio et condictio.
Since the action of theft pertains to the pursuit of a penalty, but the condictio and vindicatio pertain to the recovery of the thing, it appears that, even if the thing is recovered, the action of theft is nonetheless unimpaired, but the vindicatio and condictio are extinguished; just as, conversely, after the payment of the double or quadruple penalty, the vindicatio and condictio remain unimpaired.
§47.2.55.4Qui ferramenta sciens commodauerit ad effringendum ostium uel armarium, uel scalam sciens commodauerit ad ascendendum: licet nullum eius consilium principaliter ad furtum faciendum interuenerit, tamen furti actione tenetur.
He who has knowingly lent iron tools to break open a door or a chest, or has knowingly lent a ladder to climb up, although no plan of his primarily intervened for committing the theft, is nevertheless liable to the action of theft.
§47.2.55.5Si tutor qui negotia gerit aut curator transegerit cum fure, euanescit furti actio.
If a guardian who manages affairs or a curator has made a transaction with the thief, the action of theft is extinguished.

Notes

  1. §47.2.55.1Eum ... obligari responsum est — The accusative with infinitive construction (eum ... obligari) functions as the subject clause of the impersonal passive verb responsum est ('it was answered'). The pronoun eum is modified by the relative clause qui ... commodauerit.
  2. §47.2.55.1nec mouere quem debet — Here mouere is a transitive verb meaning 'to trouble, disturb, or cause doubt in,' and quem is the accusative of the indefinite pronoun (equivalent to aliquem after nec). The phrase literally means 'nor ought it to move anyone,' conveying an impersonal recommendation that 'no one should be in doubt.'
  3. §47.2.55.2non aliter ... quam si — The correlative construction non aliter ... quam si ('not otherwise... than if') expresses a strict condition ('only if'). It is used here with the subjunctive present defendat to indicate a hypothetical condition.
  4. §47.2.55.3recepta re — An ablative absolute construction (noun + perfect participle) representing a concessive ('even if the thing is recovered') or temporal ('when the thing is recovered') circumstance. It highlights that the recovery of the property does not affect the penal action of theft.
  5. §47.2.55.4sciens — A present participle in the nominative case, modifying the subject qui. It functions adverbially to emphasize the subjective element of knowledge (intent, dolus) when lending the tools ('knowingly').

Cite this passage

Justinian I, The Digest of Justinian §47.2.55.pr-47.2.55.5. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi2806.phi002.humanitext-lat1:47.2.55.pr-47.2.55.5

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.