[PAULUS libro uicensimo secundo quaestionum. ] §9.2.55.prStichum aut Pamphilum promisi Titio, cum Stichus esset decem milium, Pamphilus uiginti: stipulator Stichum ante moram occidit: quaesitum est de actione legis Aquiliae.
[PAULUS, in the twenty-second book of Questions.] I promised Stichus or Pamphilus to Titius, when Stichus was worth ten thousand [sesterces] and Pamphilus twenty thousand. The stipulator killed Stichus before default; the question was raised concerning the action under the Lex Aquilia.
respondi: cum uiliorem occidisse proponitur, in hunc tractatum nihilum differt ab extraneo creditor.
I replied: when it is proposed that [the creditor] killed the cheaper one, in this discussion the creditor differs in no way from a stranger.
quanti igitur fiet aestimatio, utrum decem milium, quanti fuit occisus, an quanti est, quem necesse habeo dare, id est quanti mea interest? et quid dicemus, si et Pamphilus decesserit sine mora? iam pretium Stichi minuetur, quoniam liberatus est promissor? et sufficiet fuisse pluris cum occideretur uel intra annum.
How much, then, will the assessment be: whether ten thousand, the value of the one killed, or the value of the one I am under a necessity to give, that is, the amount of my interest? And what shall we say if Pamphilus also should die without default? Will the price of Stichus now be reduced, since the promisor has been released? Or will it suffice that he was of higher value when he was killed, or within the year?
hac quidem ratione etiam si post mortem Pamphili intra annum occidatur, pluris uidebitur fuisse.
Indeed, by this reasoning, even if he is killed within a year after the death of Pamphilus, he will seem to have been of higher value.