Gaius, On Manumissions, Book I. The curator of an insane person can under no circumstances grant freedom to his slave, because this is a matter not included in his administration; for, in disposing of the property of the insane person, he only alienates it where it relates to the management of the affairs of his trust, and therefore, if he alienates any property by way of a donation, the transfer will be of no effect, unless he does this on account of some great advantage it affords the insane person, after an investigation has been made by the court.

Gaius, On Manumissions, Book I. The law provides that even infants are entitled to freedom.

Gaius, On Manumissions, Book I. If a minor manumits a slave for the purpose of making him his guardian: Fufidius says that this should be approved. Nerva, the son, holds the contrary opinion, which is correct. For it would be the height of absurdity for the judgment of a minor to be held to be sufficiently good to enable him to select a guardian, when in every other transaction he is controlled by the authority of his guardian, because his judgment is weak.

Gaius, On Manumissions, Book I. When a slave is given by way of pledge, in general terms, there is no doubt that he belongs to the debtor, and can legally obtain his freedom from him, if this is not prevented by the Lex Ælia Sentia; that is to say, if the owner is solvent, and his creditors do not appear to have been defrauded by his act. 1Where a slave is bequeathed under a condition, he belongs absolutely to the heir while the condition is pending; but he cannot obtain his freedom from him lest injury be done to the legatee.

Gaius, On Manumissions, Book III. When a wealthy man becomes the heir of a person who is poor, let us see whether this will be of any advantage to the slaves who are granted their freedom by will, without the creditors of the estate being defrauded. And, indeed, there are certain authorities who hold that when a rich man appears as the heir, it is the same as if the testator had died after having increased his estate. But I have been informed (and this is our practice), that it makes no difference whether the heir is rich or poor, but the amount of the estate of which the testator died possessed must alone be taken into consideration. Julianus adopts this opinion to the extent that he holds that grants of freedom will not take effect where the testator was insolvent, and ordered the slave to be free, as follows, “Let Stichus be free when my debts are paid.” This opinion, however, does not coincide with that of Sabinus and Cassius, which Julianus himself appears to accept, as he thinks that the intention of the testator who manumitted the slave should be considered. For a person who orders his slave to be free under such a condition does so without any intention of committing a fraud, since he is held clearly to desire that his creditors shall not be cheated.