Ad Dig. 18,1,46Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. II, § 440, Note 7.The Same, On Informers. It is not lawful for anyone holding a public office to purchase property belonging to the same, either himself or by any other person; otherwise, he will not only lose the property, but he can also be sued for fourfold damages, in accordance with the Constitution of Severus and Antoninus. This rule applies to the Steward of the Imperial Household. It can only be enforced, however, where permission to make such a purchase has not been expressly granted to the official in question.

Marcianus, On Informers. Where substitutes avenge the death of the testator, shall the estate be transferred to them? Papinianus says that it should not, for the penalty of the first degree ought not to be the reward of the second. 1Where a legacy was bequeathed to an heir appointed to a portion of the estate, and he failed to avenge the death of the deceased, the Divine Severus and Antoninus stated in a Rescript that he should be deprived of the share of the estate which had been bequeathed to him. 2Estates bequeathed by will, as well as those derived from intestate succession, must be taken away from heirs who have been derelict in avenging the death of the deceased (even if they appear as patrons), although they may be entitled to the succession as direct heirs.

Marcianus, On Informers. Where anyone is proved to have sold a house or a part of the same for the purpose of demolishing it and selling the materials, it has been decided that the purchaser and the vendor should each be liable for the amount for which the house was sold. If, however, he should dispose of the marbles or columns of his house to be used in some public work, he can legally do so.

Marcianus, 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.

Marcianus, On Informers. For he should be deprived of the estate as being unworthy of it.

Marcianus, On Informers. It is not lawful for either private individuals or the Treasury to raise any question with reference to the civil condition of deceased persons after five years from the time of their death. 1Nor can the condition of him who died within five years be reconsidered, if, by doing so, the status of one who has died more than five years previously will be prejudiced. 2Nor can any question be raised with reference to the condition of a man who is living, if, by doing so, the condition of one who died more than five years previously will be prejudiced. This point was decided by the Divine Hadrian. 3Sometimes, however, it is not permitted to raise a question with reference to the status of the deceased within five years from the time of his death. For it is provided by a Rescript of the Divine Marcus that if anyone has been judicially declared to be freeborn, it may be permitted to review the decision rendered during the lifetime of the person who has been pronounced freeborn, but not after his death. To such an extent is this true that even if the review of the case has been begun, it will be extinguished by death; as is set forth in the same Rescript. 4If anyone reviews a decision of this kind in order to reduce the person to an inferior condition, this should be opposed, according to what I have already stated. But what if the intention was to improve his condition, as, for instance, to have him declared a freedman instead of a slave; why should this not be permitted? What course must be pursued, if he is said to be a slave, the issue of a female slave, who has been dead for more than five years? Why should he not be alleged to prove that she was free; for this itself is in favor of the deceased? Marcellus in the Fifth Book of the Duties of Proconsul stated that this should be done. I also adopted the same opinion in the audience room.

Marcianus, On Informers. Persons who have been accused, or have been caught while committing a crime, and, through fear of impending accusation, kill themselves, have no heirs. Papinianus, nevertheless, in the Sixteenth Book of Opinions, says that where persons who have not yet been accused of crime, lay violent hands on themselves, their property shall not be confiscated by the Treasury; for it is not the wickedness of the deed that renders it punishable, but it is held that the consciousness of guilt entertained by the defendant is considered to take the place of a confession. Hence, the property of those who ought to be accused, or have been caught committing a crime, or who have killed themselves, should be confiscated. 1Moreover, as the Divine Pius stated in a Rescript, the property of anyone who kills himself after he has been accused should be confiscated by the Treasury only where he was accused of a crime for which, if he were convicted, he could be punished with death or deportation. 2He also stated in a Rescript that anyone who is charged with a theft of little importance, although he may have put an end to his life while the accusation was pending, should not be considered to be in a position that would justify his heirs being deprived of his estate; as he himself would not have been deprived of it if he had been found guilty of theft. 3Therefore, in conclusion, it should be said that the property of him who has laid violent hands on himself should be forfeited to the Treasury, if he was implicated in the crime to such an extent that he would have lost his property if he had been convicted. 4If, however, anyone, through weariness of life, or incapacity to suffer pain, or, for any other reason, should put an end to his life, the Divine Antoninus stated in a Rescript that he could have a successor. 5Moreover, where a father laid violent hands on himself because he was said to have killed his son, he was considered to have done so rather on account of grief for the loss of his child, and hence, as the Divine Hadrian stated in a Rescript, his property should not be confiscated. 6A distinction should be made in these cases, for it makes a difference for what reason a person commits suicide, just as when the question is asked whether he who did so and did not succeed should be punished as having imposed sentence upon himself; for, by all means, he should be punished, unless he was compelled to take this step through weariness of life, or because he was incapable of enduring pain of some description. This is reasonable, for he should be punished if he laid violent hands on himself without any cause, as he who did not spare himself would still less spare another. 7It is, however, provided by the Imperial Mandates that the property of those who die either while in confinement or at liberty under bond shall not be confiscated, as long as the result of their cases is uncertain. 8But, where anyone has committed suicide without having a just cause for doing so, and dies after an accusation has been filed, and his heirs are ready to defend his case and show that he was innocent, let us see whether they should be heard, and whether his property should be confiscated to the Treasury before the crime has been proved, or if it should be confiscated under all circumstances. The Divine Pius stated in a Rescript addressed to Modestus Taurinus that when the heirs are prepared to undertake the defence, the property should not be confiscated unless the commission of the crime is proved.

Marcianus, On Informers. Women are not permitted to act as informers on account of the weakness of their sex, and this has been provided in the Sacred Constitutions. 1In like manner, illustrious men cannot act as informers. 2Also, persons who have been convicted cannot act as informers, as was stated by the Divine Brothers in a Rescript with reference to a person who had been beaten with rods, and then sentenced to the public works. 3Again, those who have been condemned to the mines are forbidden to act as informers by the Imperial Constitutions, for the reason that, being desperate, they may readily have recourse to denunciation without cause. 4It has, however, been stated in Rescripts that where good reasons existed for giving information before their conviction, they could give it after this had taken place. 5Veterans are also prohibited by the Sacred Constitutions from acting as informers, on account of the honor and the merits of the military profession. 6In like manner, soldiers are forbidden to act as informers on account of the honor of the military service. 7Anyone, however, can give information with reference to a case in which he is interested with, the Treasury; that is to say, he can make a claim, nor will he become infamous on this account even though he may not succeed. 8Again, it was stated by the Divine Severus and Antoninus in Rescripts that those who have been guardians or curators could not act as informers in favor of their wards or their minors. The same rule should be observed with reference to one who transacts business as an agent; and this was also stated by the same Emperors in Rescripts. They also decreed that the interrogation of an agent was not prohibited by any constitution, but that he could not accuse the person whose business he transacted; and they published in a Rescript that a guardian, who either acted as informer, or caused this to be done, should be severely punished. 9But not only he who sold property should not, either himself, or through another who has been substituted, furnish information concerning it, lest otherwise he may be liable to a personal penalty, as it is stated has been decided. 10Papinianus, in the Sixth and Eleventh Books of his Opinions, says finally that public money shall be taken from anyone who is a creditor, and who as such, received it in payment of a debt, if he either knew at the time when he received it that his debtor also owed the Treasury, or if he learned this afterwards, before he had used the money. It is, however, settled that, by all means, he should be deprived of the money, even if he was ignorant of the facts at the time that he used it. And the Emperors afterwards stated in a Rescript that he would be entitled to a direct action after the money had been taken from him, as Marcellus also says in the Seventh Book of the Digest.

Marcianus, On Informers. Property which is in dispute should not be sold by the Manager of the Imperial Revenues, but its sale should be postponed; as the Divine Severus and Antoninus stated in a Rescript. And if a person accused of high treason should die, and his heir is ready to prove the innocence of the deceased, they ordered the sale of the property to be suspended; and, in general they forbade property which is in litigation to be sold by the Manager of the Imperial Revenues. 1Managers of the Imperial Revenues can, however, sell property which has been pledged. If, however, it has been encumbered to another by the right of pledge, the Manager of the Imperial Revenues should not injure the rights of creditors; but if any of the property remains, the Manager of the Imperial Revenues is permitted to dispose of it under the condition of first satisfying the preferred creditors, and if there is any excess remaining, it will be paid into the Treasury; or if the Treasury receives the entire price, he himself must make payment; or if the Manager of the Imperial Revenues has merely sold the property, he shall order the money proved to be due to any private creditor to be paid to him. This the Divine Severus and Antoninus stated in a Rescript. 2The Divine Pius stated in a Rescript that he was not willing to accept the gift of a lawsuit, even though the party offering to give it should say that he intended to leave his entire estate to the Emperor; and also that he would not accept a part of the property as a donation. He added that a person of this kind should be punished for entertaining such a base and malicious design, and that the penalty should be inflicted at the very moment of his appearance, unless it appeared to be too severe. 3As no one is compelled to give information, he who has once done so is not permitted to desist, as the Divine Severus and Antoninus stated in a Rescript; and the same rule applies even though the informer may have given the notice by the direction of another. It was clearly stated in the Rescript that the informer should be heard if he desires to withdraw the denunciation, provided he complains that the person who employed him has desisted.

Marcianus, On Informers. Not only is the informer punished if he does not prove his allegations, but also the person who directed him to make them, and whom the informer should compel to appear.

Marcianus, On Informers. No city has the same privilege as the Treasury with reference to the property of a debtor, unless it has been expressly conceded by the Emperor.