1Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book LV. The Prætor says: “If a farmer of the public revenue, or anyone belonging to the family of a farmer of the public revenue, takes anything by force in his name, and it is not restored to the owner, I will grant an action for double its value, and if suit is brought after a year has elapsed, I will grant one for its simple value. Moreover, I will grant an action, if any damage has been sustained, or any theft is said to have been committed. If the parties concerned in the matter are not produced, I will grant an action against the masters, without the privilege of surrendering their slaves by way of reparation.” 1This Title has reference to farmers of the public revenue. Those are farmers of the revenue who handle the public funds, and they bear this name whether they pay a certain percentage to the Treasury, or collect tribute. Those, also, who lease property from the Treasury are properly called farmers of the revenue. 2Someone may ask, of what benefit is the Edict in question, just as if the Prætor had not elsewhere made provision for thefts, injuries, and robbery wifh violence. The Prætor, however, thought that, under the circumstances, it was best to issue a special Edict against farmers of the revenue. 3The penalty inflicted by this Edict is, in some respects, less severe, as damages are given for double the amount; whereas in the case of robbery with violence, they are quadrupled, as they also are in the case of manifest theft. 4Moreover, the farmer of the revenue is granted the power to restore property taken by violence, and if he does so, he will be released from all responsibility, and will not be liable to a penal action under this Section of the Edict. Hence, the question arises, if anyone desires to bring an action against a farmer of the revenue, not under this Edict, but under the general law relating to taking property by violence, unlawful damage, or theft, can he do so? It is established that he can, and Pomponius also holds the same opinion, for it would be absurd for the legal position of a farmer of the public revenue to be considered better than that of other persons. 5The term “family,” mentioned in the Edict, not only refers to the slaves of farmers of the revenue, but also to all those included in their households. Therefore, whether their own children or the slaves of others are employed in the collection of taxes, they will be included in this Edict. Hence, if the slave of a farmer of the revenue commits robbery with violence, but is not among the number of those who are employed in the collection of taxes, this Edict will not apply. 6What the Prætor says in the last place, namely, “If they are not produced, I will grant an action against their masters, without the privilege of surrendering them by way of reparation,” is a special provision of this Edict, because if the slaves are not produced, an action will be granted without the privilege of surrendering them by way of reparation, whether the masters have them in their power or not; and whether they can produce them or not.

2Gaius, On the Provincial Edict, Book XXI. A master shall not be allowed to defend his absent slave.

3Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book LV. If the slave should not be produced by the master, the noxal action should be brought against him. Therefore, what makes the condition of the farmers of the revenue so trying is that they must select good slaves for this employment. 1Where the Prætor says, “Against the masters,” we must understand this to mean against the associates of the collectors of taxes, although they may not be their masters. 2The plaintiff must mention beforehand the person or persons whom he may desire to be produced, so that, if this is not done, he will have a right of action. Even if he should say, “Produce all the parties, in order that I may recognize the one who is guilty,” I think that he ought to be heard. 3Where several slaves have committed the theft or the damage, the rule ought to be observed that if the farmer of the revenue pays as large a sum as if a freeman had perpetrated the offence, he should be released from liability.

4Paulus, On the Edict, Book LII. If a farmer of the revenue, who removed the property by force should die, Labeo says that the action should be granted against his heir who profited by the act. 1The Divine Hadrian, in a Rescript addressed to the Governors of Gaul, stated with reference to property which the Governors were accustomed to have transported for their use, that when anyone sends for the purpose of making purchases for the benefit of those who command armies or govern provinces, or for that of their agents, he shall sign an order with his own hand, and send the same to the farmer of the revenue, so that if the latter should transfer anything more than he had been ordered to do, he must make it good. 2In the collection of all revenues, the custom of the neighborhood is usually considered; and this is provided by the Imperial Constitutions.

5Gaius, On the Edict of the Urban Prætor, Title: Farmers of the Revenue. It is provided by this Edict that if the property should be restored before issue has been joined, the right of action will be extinguished; still, after this, suit for the penalty can be brought. If, however, Ihe farmer of the revenue is ready to make restitution even after issue has been joined, he should be released from liability. 1We may ask whether the payment of double damages provided by the Edict is entirely a penalty, and suit can afterwards be brought for the recovery of the property; or whether the recovery of the property is included in the double damages, so that the penalty is only simple. The weight of opinion is that the property is included in the double damages.

6Modestinus, On Penalties, Book II. Where several farmers of the revenue have unlawfully exacted something, the action to recover double damages is not multiplied, but all of them must pay their shares, and what cannot be paid by one shall be collected from another, as the Divine Severus and Antoninus stated in a Rescript; for they held that there was a great difference between persons who perpetrated a crime, and those who participated in the commission of a fraud.

7Papirius Justus, On Constitutions, Book II. The Emperors Antoninus and Verus stated in a Rescript that in the case of the taxes on public lands, the lands themselves, and not the persons holding them, should be made the subject of the action, and therefore that the possessors must pay any tax which was due, even for time which had passed before they obtained possession; and that, in a case of this kind, if they were not aware that any tax was due, they would be entitled to an action. 1It was also stated in the Rescript that a ward would be released from liability to the penalty of confiscation, if he paid the tax within thirty days.

8Papinianus, Opinions, Book XIII. The offence of evading taxation by fraud is transmitted to the heir of the person who committed the fraud, to the extent of causing confiscation of the property. 1Where one of several heirs for the purpose of evading the tax removes any of the property held in common, the others will not be deprived of their shares.

9Paulus, Sentences, Book V. If the heat of competition should induce a bidder desiring to obtain the farming of public revenues to raise his offer above the ordinary amount, it must be accepted, if he who makes the highest bid is ready to furnish sufficient security. 1No one can be compelled, against his consent, to lease the collection of taxes; and therefore when the time of the lease had expired, a new contract must be made. 2Farmers of the revenue, who have not made a settlement for the taxes collected by them, and who wish to enter into a new contract, shall not be permitted to do so before paying what is due under the former one. 3The debtors of the Treasury, as well as those of a city, are forbidden to contract to collect taxes, in order that their responsibilities may not be increased from another cause, unless they offer sureties who are able to satisfy their obligations. 4Where partners in collecting the revenue administer their office separately, one of them can legally petition to have the share of another who is less fitted for the place transferred to himself. 5Where anything has been unlawfully exacted, either from the public, or from private individuals, double the amount shall be paid to those who suffered the injury; anything, however, which has been extorted by violence shall be refunded together with a triple penalty, and, in addition to this, they will be liable to extraordinary prosecution; for, in the first instance, the right of private individuals, and in the second, the interest of the public demands it. 6Taxes on property on which no tax has ever been paid cannot be collected. If the indulgence of the farmer of the revenue should release property from taxation, on which it has been customary to pay, another is not forbidden to make the collection. 7It has been established that property for the use of the army is not liable to taxation. 8The Treasury is exempt from the payment of any tax. Merchants, however, who are accustomed to deal in goods purchased with funds belonging to the Treasury cannot enjoy immunity from the payment of taxes.

10Hermogenianus, Epitomes, Book V. Neither the Governors of provinces, the agents of municipalities, nor assemblies of the people are permitted to impose taxes, or to modify, add to, or diminish those already imposed, without the authority of the Emperor. 1Where farmers of the revenue have not paid what they owe to the Treasury, they cannot be discharged, even if the terms of their leases have expired; but interest can be collected from them when they are in default.

11Paulus, Opinions, Book V. It is not permitted, under penalty of death, to sell to enemies flints used for striking fire, iron, wheat, or salt. 1Public lands, which are held under a perpetual lease, cannot be taken from the lessee by an agent of the government without the authority of the Emperor. 2If either the owner of a ship, or any of the passengers, should unlawfully bring any merchandise on board, the ship as well as the merchandise can be confiscated by the Treasury. If anything of this kind is done in the absence of the owner, by the master, the helmsman, the pilot, or any sailor, he shall be put to death, and the merchandise shall be confiscated, but the vessel must be restored to the owner. 3Prosecution for dealing in contraband merchandise also extends to the heir of the guilty party. 4The owner of property which has been confiscated is not forbidden to purchase the same either himself, or through others whom he has directed to do so. 5Persons who have profited greatly from the farming of the public revenues are compelled to take them on the same terms on which they formerly held them, if the same amount cannot be obtained from others.

12Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XXXVIII. There is no one who is not aware of the audacity and insolence of farmers of the revenue, and therefore the Prætor promulgated this Edict for the purpose of controlling them. 1“If anyone belonging to the household of a farmer of the revenue is accused of having committed theft, or has caused unlawful injury, and the property in question is not produced, I shall grant an action against the master, without the privilege of surrendering the slave by way of reparation.” 2It must be noted that, in this instance, the slaves of the farmer of the revenue are meant by the term “household.” If, however, a slave belonging to another should be in the service of the farmer of the revenue, in good faith, he will also be included. Perhaps this would also be the case where he served him in bad faith, for wandering and fugitive slaves are often employed in work of this kind by persons who know who they are. Hence, if a freeman is serving in good faith as a slave, this Edict will also apply to him. 3Those also are called farmers of the revenue who lease the income from public lands.

13Gaius, On the Provincial Edict, Book XIII. They also are included under the term farmers of the revenue who lease the income from salt pits, quarries, and mines belonging to the State. 1This Edict also applies to one who leases from the government the collection of taxes from a municipality. 2He who has a number of seditious slaves employed will be liable for the acts of one of them, if he should sell or manumit him, or even if the slave should take to flight. 3But what must be done if the slave should die? Let us see whether the farmer of the revenue will be responsible, as for his own act. I think that he should be released from liability, as he had not the power of producing the slave, and was not guilty of fraud. 4We grant this action as perpetual, and it will pass to the heir and other successors.

14Ulpianus, Disputations, Book VIII. The confiscation of property on the ground of non-payment of taxes also extends to the heir, for what is confiscated immediately ceases to belong to the party who committed the crime, and the ownership of the same is acquired by the Treasury. Therefore, proceedings for confiscation can be instituted against the heir, just as against any possessor whomsoever.

15Alfenus Varus, Digest, Book VII. When the Emperor leased the quarries of the island of Crete, he inserted the following clause in the lease: “No one except the farmer of the revenue shall make an excavation, or remove, or take out a single stone from the quarries of the Island of Crete, after the Ides of March.” A ship belonging to a certain individual, which was loaded with flints, having departed from the harbor of Crete before the Ides of March, was driven back into the harbor by the wind and departed the second time after the Ides of March. Advice was asked whether the flints should be held to have been removed contrary to law after the Ides of March. The answer was that although the harbors, which themselves were parts of the island, should all be considered as belonging to it, still, as the vessel, having left the port before the Ides of March, was driven back to the island by a storm, and afterwards departed, it should not be held to have done so in violation of law; especially as the flints must be considered to have been removed before the time prescribed, since the ship had already left the harbor.

16Marcianus, On Informers. Sometimes a slave, who has been confiscated, should not be sold, but his appraised value should be paid by his owner, instead. For the Divine Severus and Antoninus stated in a Rescript that where a slave, who was said to have transacted the business of his master, is confiscated, he should not be sold; but his appraised value should be paid in accordance with the judgment of a good citizen. 1The same Emperors stated in this Rescript that if the slave should fail to file a proper account, and was proved to have rendered himself liable to confiscation, or was alleged to have corrupted the wife of his master, or had committed any other serious offence, the Deputy of the Emperor should take cognizance of the matter, and if the slave is found to be guilty, his value should be appraised, and he must be delivered up to his master to be punished. 2The Divine Severus and Antoninus also stated in a Rescript, that where slaves have made themselves liable to confiscation, their peculium is not included unless property forming part of it should itself have become subject to forfeiture. 3Where anyone does not declare, as liable to taxation, slaves whom he is transporting either to be sold, or employed, he will incur the penalty of confiscation; still, this applies only to newly acquired slaves, and not to such as are old. Old slaves are those who have been in servitude for an entire year, in a town; new ones, however, are understood to be such as have not yet been in servitude for a year. 4Slaves, who are in flight, are not liable to confiscation, as they went away without the consent of their masters. This has been expressly provided by the Imperial Constitutions, as the Divine Pius frequently stated in Rescripts that it was not in the power of slaves to escape the control of their masters by taking to flight, if the latter were unwilling, or were not aware of the fact. 5The Divine Hadrian decided that, although a person may allege ignorance, he will, nevertheless, be liable to the penalty of confiscation. 6The Divine Marcus and Commodus also stated in a Rescript that a farmer of the revenue was not to blame for not instructing those who violated the law, but that he must be careful that those who were willing to declare their property for taxation should not be deceived. 7Merchandise subject to duty is as follows: cinnamon, long pepper, white pepper, pentaspherum, Barbary leaf, costum, costamomum, nard, Turian cassia, the wood of the cassia tree, myrrh, amomum, ginger, malabathrun, Indian spice, chalbane, benzoin, assafœtida, aloes, wood, Arabian onyx, cardamon, cinnamon wood, flax, Babylonian furs, Parthian furs, ivory, Indian iron, linen, all precious stones, pearls, sardonyx, crystals, hyacinths, emeralds, diamonds, sapphires, beryls, callaini, Indian drugs, Sarmation cloth, silk and muslin, painted hangings, fine fabrics, silk goods, eunuchs, Indian lions and lionesses, male and female panthers, leopards, purple, wool, crimson dye and Indian hair. 8The Divine Brothers stated in a Rescript that if a cargo was unavoidably exposed to bad weather it should not, on this account, be confiscated. 9The Divine Pius stated in a Rescript that where a person, said to be a minor under twenty-five years of age, declared that his slaves were for his own use, and he made a mistake, merely in the return of said slaves, he should be excused. 10The Divine Brothers also stated in a Rescript that where the slaves of anyone became liable to confiscation, not through fraud, but through mistake, the farmers of the revenue should remain content with double the amount of the tax, and should restore the slaves to the owner. 11The great Antoninus stated in a Rescript that if a tenant, or his own slaves, should unlawfully have a manufactory of arms on the land of the owner, without his knowledge, he would not be liable to any penalty. 12If anyone should make a declaration to a farmer of the revenue, and does not pay the tax, and it should be remitted by the farmer of the revenue (as is customary at times), the Divine Severus and Antoninus stated in a Rescript that the property should not be confiscated; for they say that there is no ground for confiscation after the declaration has been made, as what is due to the Treasury can be collected from the property of the farmers of the revenue, or from that of their sureties. 13Penalties cannot be collected from heirs where proceedings were not instituted during the lifetime of the person who was delinquent. This rule, as is the case with other penalties, is also applicable to those relating to taxation. 14The Divine Severus and Antoninus stated in a Rescript that if a farmer of the revenue, through the mistake of the person making payment, receives more than is due, he must refund it.