[MARCIANUS libro singulari de delatoribus. ] §49.14.18.prDeferre non possunt mulieres propter sexus infirmitatem, et ita sacris constitutionibus cautum est.
[MARCIANUS, On Informers, in One Book.] Women cannot bring information due to the weakness of their sex, and it is so provided by the sacred constitutions.
§49.14.18.1Item clarissimi uiri deferre non possunt.
Likewise, illustrious men (clarissimi) cannot bring information.
§49.14.18.2Item damnati deferre non possunt, ut diui fratres de eo rescripserunt, qui fustibus caesus in opus publicum erat datus.
Likewise, those who have been condemned cannot bring information, as the deified brothers replied in a rescript concerning one who had been beaten with clubs and put to public labor.
§49.14.18.3Item constitutionibus principum prohibentur deferre illi, qui in metallum dati sunt.
Likewise, those who have been sentenced to the mines are prohibited by the constitutions of the emperors from bringing information.
hoc ideo, ne desperati ad delationem facile possint sine causa confugere.
This is so that desperate individuals cannot easily flee to information without cause.
§49.14.18.4Sed eas causas, quas ante damnationem coeperunt deferre, posse eos etiam post damnationem exequi rescriptum est.
But it has been replied in a rescript that they can pursue even after condemnation those cases which they had begun to report before condemnation.
§49.14.18.5Ueterani quoque sacris constitutionibus delatores esse prohibentur propter honorem utique et merita militiae.
Veterans also are prohibited by the sacred constitutions from being informers, indeed because of the honor and merits of their military service.
§49.14.18.6Item milites propter honorem stipendiorum quae merent deferre prohibentur.
Likewise, soldiers are prohibited from bringing information because of the honor of the service which they perform.
§49.14.18.7Sed communem causam sibi cum fisco quiuis deferre potest, hoc est uindicare, nec per hoc famosus est, licet in causa sua non optinuerit.
But anyone can bring information on a case common to himself and the treasury, that is to say, to assert a claim, and he does not become infamous through this, even if he does not prevail in his own case.
§49.14.18.8Item eos, qui tutores uel curatores fuerunt, non oportere deferre causas pupillorum uel adulescentium suorum diui Seuerus et Antoninus rescripserunt.
Likewise, the deified Severus and Antoninus replied in a rescript that those who have been tutors or curators ought not to bring information on the cases of their pupils or youths.
quod consequens est obseruari et in eo, qui quasi procurator negotia gessit: et ita idem principes rescripserunt.
It follows that this should also be observed in the case of one who managed business as if he were a procurator; and the same emperors replied to this effect.
idem decreuerunt nulla constitutione prohibitum esse procuratorem interrogari, sed accusare eum, cuius negotia gessit.
The same emperors decreed that no constitution prohibits a procurator from being questioned, but prohibits him from accusing the person whose business he managed.
et tutorem, qui aut detulit aut mandauit, seuerissime puniendum rescripserunt.
And they replied in a rescript that a tutor who either brought information himself or ordered it to be brought must be punished most severely.
§49.14.18.9Sed ne quidem is, qui aliquam uendidit rem, eandem deferre debet uel per se uel per subiectam personam, ne alioquin poenam patiatur dignam suae personae, ut et constitutum esse refertur.
But not even he who has sold a certain thing ought to bring information regarding the same thing, either by himself or through a suborned person, lest otherwise he suffer a penalty suitable to his status, as it is also reported to have been established.
§49.14.18.10Papinianus tam libro sexto quam undecimo responsorum scribit ita demum publicam auferri pecuniam ei, qui, cum erat creditor, in solutum pecuniam accepit, si aut sciebat, cum accipiebat, publicum quoque esse debitorem, aut postea cognouit, antequam consumeret pecuniam.
Papinian, both in the sixth and the eleventh books of his Responses, writes that public money is taken away from one who, while he was a creditor, received money in payment, only if he either knew, when he received it, that the debtor was also a debtor to the public, or discovered it afterwards, before he spent the money.
sed placet omnimodo ei pecuniam auferendam esse, etiamsi ignorauit, cum consumeret: et postea quidam principes directam actionem competere ablata pecunia rescripserunt, ut et Marcellus libro septimo digestorum scribit.
But the accepted opinion is that the money must be taken away from him in any event, even if he was ignorant when he spent it; and afterwards certain emperors replied in a rescript that a direct action is competent once the money has been taken away, as Marcellus also writes in the seventh book of the Digests.