Corpus iurisprudentiae Romanae

Repertorium zu den Quellen des römischen Rechts

Digesta Iustiniani Augusti

Recognovit Mommsen (1870) et retractavit Krüger (1928)
Convertit in Anglica lingua Scott (1932)
Marcian.iud. publ.
De publicis iudiciis lib.Marciani De publicis iudiciis libri

De publicis iudiciis libri

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50

Ex libro I

Dig. 1,18,15Mar­cia­nus li­bro pri­mo de iu­di­ciis pu­bli­cis. Il­lud ob­ser­van­dum est, ne qui pro­vin­ciam re­git fi­nes eius ex­ce­dat ni­si vo­ti sol­ven­di cau­sa, dum ta­men ab­noc­ta­re ei non li­ceat.

Marcianus, On Criminal Trials, Book I. One thing must be observed, he who governs the province must not pass its boundaries unless for the purpose of fulfilling a vow; and, even then he must not spend a night outside.

Dig. 1,22,2Mar­cia­nus li­bro pri­mo de iu­di­ciis pu­bli­cis. Li­ber­ti ad­si­de­re pos­sunt. in­fa­mes au­tem li­cet non pro­hi­bean­tur le­gi­bus ad­si­de­re, at­ta­men ar­bi­tror, ut ali­quo quo­que de­cre­to prin­ci­pa­li re­fer­tur con­sti­tu­tum, non pos­se of­fi­cio ad­ses­so­ris fun­gi.

Marcianus, On Criminal Trials, Book I. Freedmen can act as assessors, and although persons who are infamous are not prohibited by law from doing so, still, I am of the opinion that they cannot perform the duties of an assessor; and, indeed, it is said that there is an Imperial Constitution extant upon this subject.

Dig. 48,1,9Mar­cia­nus li­bro pri­mo de iu­di­ciis pu­bli­cis. Scien­dum est, si in ca­pi­ta­li cau­sa suum ser­vum reum cri­mi­ne fac­tum quis non de­fen­de­rit, non eum pro de­relic­to ha­be­ri, et id­eo, si ab­so­lu­tus fue­rit, non li­be­rum fie­ri, sed ma­ne­re do­mi­ni.

Marcianus, On Public Prosecutions, Book I. It must be remembered that if anyone should not defend his own slave, when he is accused of a capital crime, he will not be considered as having abandoned him; and therefore if the slave should be acquitted, he will not become free, but will still remain the property of his master.

Dig. 48,2,13Mar­cia­nus li­bro pri­mo de pu­bli­cis iu­di­ciis. Mu­lie­rem prop­ter pu­bli­cam uti­li­ta­tem ad an­no­nam per­ti­nen­tem au­di­ri a prae­fec­to an­no­nae de­fe­ren­tem di­vus Se­ve­rus et An­to­ni­nus re­scrip­se­runt. fa­mo­si quo­que ac­cu­san­tes si­ne ul­la du­bi­ta­tio­ne ad­mit­tun­tur. mi­li­tes quo­que, qui cau­sas alie­nas de­fer­re non pos­sunt, qui pro pa­ce ex­cu­bant, vel ma­gis ad hanc ac­cu­sa­tio­nem ad­mit­ten­di sunt. ser­vi quo­que de­fe­ren­tes au­diun­tur.

Marcianus, On Public Prosecutions, Book I. The Divine Severus and Antoninus stated in a Rescript that a woman should be heard by the Prefect of Subsistence on the ground of the public welfare, if she brought an accusation relating to the excessive price of provisions. There is no doubt that persons who have been rendered infamous should be permitted to institute proceedings of this kind. Soldiers, also, who cannot prosecute the cases of others, because they guard the peace, can all the more readily be permitted to bring this accusation. When slaves bring it, they should also be heard.

Dig. 48,5,29Mar­cia­nus li­bro pri­mo de iu­di­ciis pu­bli­cis. Quod ex his cau­sis de­be­tur, per con­dic­tio­nem, quae ex le­ge de­scen­dit, pe­ti­tur.

Marcianus, On Public Prosecutions, Book I. Anything which may be due in these different cases can be recovered by a personal action derived from the law.

Dig. 48,5,34Mar­cia­nus li­bro pri­mo de pu­bli­cis iu­di­ciis. Si quis ad­ul­te­rium a ser­vo suo com­mis­sum di­cat in eam, quam uxo­rem ha­buit, di­vus Pius re­scrip­sit ac­cu­sa­re po­tius mu­lie­rem eum de­be­re, quam in prae­iu­di­cium eius ser­vum suum tor­que­re. 1Si quis ad­ul­te­rum non di­mi­se­rit, sed re­ti­nue­rit, for­san fi­lium in no­ver­ca vel et­iam li­ber­tum vel ser­vum in uxo­re, ex sen­ten­tia le­gis te­ne­tur, quam­vis ver­bis non con­ti­ne­tur. quae au­tem re­ti­ne­tur, pu­ni­tur. sed si di­mis­sam re­du­xe­rit, ver­bis non te­ne­tur: sed ta­men di­cen­dum est, ut te­n­ea­tur, ne fraus fiat. 2Si uxor ex ad­ul­te­rio vi­ri prae­mium ac­ce­pe­rit, le­ge Iu­lia qua­si ad­ul­te­ra te­ne­tur.

Marcianus, Public Prosecutions, Book I. Where anyone alleges that adultery has been committed by his slave, with a woman whom he had for his wife, the Divine Pius stated in a Rescript that he must accuse the woman before subjecting his slave to torture to her prejudice. 1If anyone should not let an adulterer depart, but detains him, as, for instance, his son, accused of adultery with his stepmother, or his freedman, or slave accused with his wife, he is guilty, according to the spirit, but not according to the letter of the law. The woman, however, who is detained, shall be punished. If, however, having driven her away, he should bring her back, he is not guilty according to strict construction of the law, but he must still be considered liable in order to avoid the commission of fraud. 2If a woman receives the price of adultery committed by her husband, she will be punishable as an adulteress under the Julian Law.

Dig. 48,9,4Idem li­bro pri­mo de pu­bli­cis iu­di­ciis. cum pa­ter et ma­ter spon­si spon­sae so­ce­ro­rum, ut li­be­ro­rum spon­si ge­ne­ro­rum ap­pel­la­tio­ne con­ti­nen­tur.

The Same, On Public Prosecutions, Book I. Just as the fathers and mothers of married persons are embraced in the designation fathers and mothers-in-law, so the husbands of the children are embraced in the term sons-in-law.

Dig. 48,10,11Mar­cia­nus li­bro pri­mo de iu­di­ciis pu­bli­cis. Si pa­ter fi­lio suo mi­li­ti, quem ha­bet in po­tes­ta­te, tes­ta­men­to com­mi­li­to­nis fi­lii ali­quid ad­scrip­se­rit, quem con­mi­li­to­nem in mi­li­tia no­vit: quia pa­tri non ad­quiri­tur, ex­tra poe­nam est. et cum ma­tri fi­lius ad­scrip­se­rat, di­vi fra­tres re­scrip­se­runt, cum ius­su tes­ta­to­ris hoc scrip­sit, im­pu­ni­tum eum es­se ma­trem­que ca­pe­re pos­se.

Marcianus, On Public Prosecutions, Book I. If a father should write anything for the benefit of his son, who is a soldier, and under his control, and with whom he himself is serving, and he knows this to be the case, for the reason that nothing is acquired by the father, he will not be liable to punishment. Where a son had written a clause for the benefit of his mother, the Divine Brothers stated in a Rescript that as he had done this by order of the testator, he should go unpunished, and that his mother was entitled to the bequest.

Dig. 48,13,12Mar­cia­nus li­bro pri­mo iu­di­cio­rum pu­bli­co­rum. Hac le­ge te­ne­tur, qui in ta­bu­lis pu­bli­cis mi­no­rem pe­cu­niam, quam quid ven­ie­rit aut lo­ca­ve­rit, scrip­se­rit aliud­ve quid si­mi­le com­mi­se­rit. 1Di­vus Se­ve­rus et An­to­ni­nus quen­dam cla­ris­si­mum iu­ve­nem, cum in­ven­tus es­set ar­cu­lam in tem­plum po­ne­re ibi­que ho­mi­nem in­clu­de­re, qui post clu­sum tem­plum de ar­ca ex­iret et de tem­plo mul­ta sub­tra­he­ret et se in ar­cu­lam ite­rum re­fer­ret, con­vic­tum in in­su­lam de­por­ta­ve­runt.

Marcianus, Public Prosecutions, Book I. He is liable under this law who enters upon the public registers a smaller amount than the proceeds of a sale or a lease, or who commits any other offence of this kind. 1The Divine Severus and Antoninus, having ascertained that a young man of very illustrious lineage had a small chest placed in a temple, and, after the temple was closed, emerged out of the chest and stole many things belonging to the temple, and afterwards again shut himself up in the chest, deported him to an island, after his conviction.

Dig. 48,15,3Mar­cia­nus li­bro pri­mo iu­di­cio­rum pu­bli­co­rum. Le­gis Fa­biae cri­mi­ne sup­pres­si man­ci­pii bo­na fi­de pos­ses­sor non te­ne­tur, id est qui igno­ra­bat ser­vum alie­num, et qui vo­lun­ta­te do­mi­ni pu­ta­bat id eum age­re. et ita de bo­na fi­de pos­ses­so­re ip­sa lex scrip­ta est: nam ad­ici­tur ‘si sciens do­lo ma­lo hoc fe­ce­rit’: et sae­pis­si­me a prin­ci­pi­bus Se­ve­ro et An­to­ni­no con­sti­tu­tum est, ne bo­nae fi­dei pos­ses­so­res hac le­ge te­nean­tur. 1Il­lud non est omit­ten­dum, quod ex­em­plo le­gis Aqui­liae, si is, prop­ter quem quis in Fa­biam com­mi­sit, de­ces­se­rit, ad­huc ac­cu­sa­tio et poe­na le­gis Fa­biae su­per­est, ut et di­vus Se­ve­rus et An­to­ni­nus re­scrip­se­runt.

Marcianus, Public Prosecutions, Book I. A bona fide possessor is not liable to the penalty imposed by the Favian Law for having wrongfully withheld a slave; that is to say, if he did not know that the slave belonged to another, or if he thought that he acted with the consent of his master. And the law itself is framed in this way with reference to a bona fide possessor, for there is added, “If he did this knowingly and fraudulently.” It has very frequently been decided by the Emperors Severus and Antoninus that bona fide possessors are not liable under this law. 1It should not be forgotten that, as under the Aquilian Law, if the person on whose account the Favian Law was violated should die, the accusation and the penalty prescribed by the Favian Law will continue to exist, as the Divine Severus and Antoninus stated in a Rescript.

Dig. 50,1,8Mar­cia­nus li­bro pri­mo de iu­di­ciis pu­bli­cis. Non de­be­re co­gi de­cu­rio­nes vi­lius prae­sta­re fru­men­tum ci­vi­bus suis, quam an­no­na ex­igit, di­vi fra­tres re­scrip­se­runt, et aliis quo­que con­sti­tu­tio­ni­bus prin­ci­pa­li­bus id cau­tum est.

Marcianus, On Public Prosecutions, Book I. The Divine Brothers stated in a Rescript that decurions should not be forced to furnish grain to the people at a lower price than the supply of provisions demands; and this is also provided by other Imperial Constitutions.

Dig. 50,2,4Mar­cia­nus li­bro pri­mo de iu­di­ciis pu­bli­cis. De­cu­rio, qui pro­hi­be­tur con­du­ce­re quae­dam, si iu­re suc­ces­se­rit in con­duc­tio­ne, re­ma­net in ea. quod et in om­ni­bus si­mi­li­bus ser­van­dum est.

Marcianus, On Public Prosecutions, Book I. A decurion is forbidden to lease any property; if, however, he should succeed to a lease by inheritance, he can retain possession of it; and this rule should be observed in all similar cases.

Dig. 50,9,2Mar­cia­nus li­bro pri­mo pu­bli­co­rum. Il­la de­cre­ta, quae non le­gi­ti­mo nu­me­ro de­cu­rio­num co­ac­to fac­ta sunt, non va­lent.

Marcianus, Public Prosecutions, Book I. Decrees that are enacted without the lawful number of decurions being present are not valid.

Dig. 50,16,214Mar­cia­nus li­bro pri­mo pu­bli­co­rum iu­di­cio­rum. ‘Mu­nus’ pro­prie est, quod ne­ces­sa­rie ob­imus le­ge mo­re im­pe­rio­ve eius, qui iu­ben­di ha­bet po­tes­ta­tem. ‘do­na’ au­tem pro­prie sunt, quae nul­la ne­ces­si­ta­te iu­ris of­fi­ciis et spon­te prae­stan­tur: quae si non prae­sten­tur, nul­la re­prae­hen­sio est et, si prae­sten­tur, ple­rum­que laus in­est. sed in sum­ma in hoc ven­tum est, ut non quod­cum­que mu­nus, id et do­num ac­ci­pia­tur, at quod do­num fue­rit, id mu­nus rec­te di­ca­tur.

Marcianus, Public Prosecutions, Book I. An “obligation,” properly speaking, is something which we are obliged to do according to law, custom, or the command of someone who has the right to order it to be done. Gifts, however, are, correctly speaking, things which we voluntarily give without being compelled to do so by either law or our duty; and if they are not given, no one can be blamed, and if they are given, the donor is generally entitled to praise. In a word, it has been decided that the two terms are not interchangeable, but that a gift may properly give rise to an obligation.

Ex libro II

Dig. 18,7,2Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do pu­bli­co­rum. Ex­por­tan­dus si ven­ie­rit ab Ita­lia, in pro­vin­cia mo­ra­ri pot­est, ni­si spe­cia­li­ter pro­hi­bi­tum fue­rit.

Marcianus, Public Affairs, Book II. Where a slave is sold on condition of his being removed from Italy, he can remain in a province unless this was expressly prohibited.

Dig. 37,15,4Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do pu­bli­co­rum iu­di­cio­rum. Per pro­cu­ra­to­rem in­gra­tum li­ber­tum pos­se ar­gui di­vus Se­ve­rus et An­to­ni­nus re­scrip­se­runt.

Marcianus, Public Decisions, Book II. The Divine Severus and Antoninus stated in a Rescript that an ungrateful freedman could be accused by the agent of his patron.

Dig. 47,16,1Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do pu­bli­co­rum iu­di­cio­rum. Pes­si­mum ge­nus est re­cep­ta­to­rum, si­ne qui­bus ne­mo la­te­re diu pot­est: et prae­ci­pi­tur, ut per­in­de pu­nian­tur at­que la­tro­nes. in pa­ri cau­sa ha­ben­di sunt, qui, cum ad­pre­hen­de­re la­tro­nes pos­sent, pe­cu­nia ac­cep­ta vel sub­rep­to­rum par­te di­mi­se­runt.

Marcianus, Public Prosecutions, Book II. The harborers of criminals constitute one of the worst classes of offenders, for without them no criminal could long remain concealed. The law directs that they shall be punished as robbers. They should be placed in the same class, because when they can seize robbers they permit them to go, after having received money or a part of the stolen goods.

Dig. 47,17,2Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do iu­di­cio­rum pu­bli­co­rum. Sed si in­ter­diu fur­tum fe­ce­runt, ad ius or­di­na­rium re­mit­ten­di sunt.

Marcianus, Public Prosecutions, Book II. If they commit theft in the daytime, they should be tried in the ordinary way.

Dig. 47,19,3Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do pu­bli­co­rum iu­di­cio­rum. Di­vus Se­ve­rus et An­to­ni­nus re­scrip­se­runt elec­tio­nem es­se, utrum quis ve­lit cri­men ex­pi­la­tae he­redi­ta­tis ex­tra or­di­nem apud prae­fec­tum ur­bi vel apud prae­si­des age­re an he­redi­ta­tem a pos­ses­so­ri­bus iu­re or­di­na­rio vin­di­ca­re.

Marcianus, Public Prosecutions, Book II. The Divine Severus and Antoninus stated in a Rescript that anyone who desired to prosecute extraordinarily the crime of plundering an estate could do so either before the Prefect of the City or the Governor; or he could demand the estate from the possessors by the ordinary course of procedure.

Dig. 47,22,3Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do iu­di­cio­rum pu­bli­co­rum. Col­le­gia si qua fue­rint il­li­ci­ta, man­da­tis et con­sti­tu­tio­ni­bus et se­na­tus con­sul­tis dis­sol­vun­tur: sed per­mit­ti­tur eis, cum dis­sol­vun­tur, pe­cu­nias com­mu­nes si quas ha­bent di­vi­de­re pe­cu­niam­que in­ter se par­ti­ri. 1In sum­ma au­tem, ni­si ex se­na­tus con­sul­ti auc­to­ri­ta­te vel Cae­sa­ris col­le­gium vel quod­cum­que ta­le cor­pus co­ie­rit, con­tra se­na­tus con­sul­tum et man­da­ta et con­sti­tu­tio­nes col­le­gium ce­le­brat. 2Ser­vos quo­que li­cet in col­le­gio te­nuio­rum re­ci­pi vo­len­ti­bus do­mi­nis, ut cu­ra­to­res ho­rum cor­po­rum sciant, ne in­vi­to aut igno­ran­te do­mi­no in col­le­gium te­nuio­rum re­ci­pe­rent, et in fu­tu­rum poe­na te­nean­tur in sin­gu­los ho­mi­nes au­reo­rum cen­tum.

Marcianus, Public Prosecutions, Book II. Ad Dig. 47,22,3 pr.Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 62, Note 2.If associations are illegal, they will be dissolved by the terms of Imperial Mandates and Constitutions, and Decrees of the Senate. When they are dissolved, the members are permitted to divide among themselves the money or property owned in common, if there is any of this kind. 1In a word, unless an association or any body of this description assembles with the authority of the Decree of the Senate, or of the Emperor, this assembly is contrary to the provisions of the Decree of the Senate and the Imperial Mandates and Constitutions. 2It is also lawful for slaves to be admitted into associations of indigent persons, with the consent of their masters; and those who have charge of such societies are hereby notified that they cannot receive a slave into an association of indigent persons without the knowledge or consent of his master, and if they do, that they will be liable to a penalty of a hundred aurei for every slave admitted.

Dig. 48,3,6Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do de iu­di­ciis pu­bli­cis. Di­vus Ha­d­ria­nus Iu­lio Se­cun­do ita re­scrip­sit et alias re­scrip­tum est non es­se uti­que epis­tu­lis eo­rum cre­den­dum, qui qua­si dam­na­tos ad prae­si­dem re­mi­se­rint. idem de ire­nar­chis prae­cep­tum est, quia non om­nes ex fi­de bo­na elo­gia scri­be­re com­per­tum est. 1Sed et ca­put man­da­to­rum ex­stat, quod di­vus Pius, cum pro­vin­ciae Asiae prae­erat, sub edic­to pro­pos­uit, ut ire­nar­chae, cum ad­pre­hen­de­rint la­tro­nes, in­ter­ro­gent eos de so­ciis et re­cep­ta­to­ri­bus et in­ter­ro­ga­tio­nes lit­te­ris in­clu­sas at­que ob­sig­na­tas ad co­gni­tio­nem ma­gis­tra­tus mit­tant. igi­tur qui cum elo­gio mit­tun­tur, ex in­te­gro au­dien­di sunt, et­si per lit­te­ras mis­si fue­rint vel et­iam per ire­nar­chas per­duc­ti. sic et di­vus Pius et alii prin­ci­pes re­scrip­se­runt, ut et­iam de his, qui re­qui­ren­di ad­no­ta­ti sunt, non qua­si pro dam­na­tis, sed qua­si re in­te­gra quae­ra­tur, si quis erit qui eum ar­guat. et id­eo cum quis ἀνάκρισιν fa­ce­ret, iu­be­ri opor­tet venire ire­nar­chen et quod scrip­se­rit, ex­se­qui: et si di­li­gen­ter ac fi­de­li­ter hoc fe­ce­rit, con­lau­dan­dum eum: si pa­rum pru­den­ter non ex­qui­si­tis ar­gu­men­tis, sim­pli­ci­ter de­no­ta­re ire­nar­chen mi­nus ret­tu­lis­se: sed si quid ma­li­gne in­ter­ro­gas­se aut non dic­ta ret­tu­lis­se pro dic­tis eum com­pe­re­rit, ut vin­di­cet in ex­em­plum, ne quid et aliud post­ea ta­le fa­ce­re mo­lia­tur.

Marcianus, On Public Prosecutions, Book II. The Divine Hadrian, in a Rescript addressed to Julius Secundus, made the following statement: “It has elsewhere been set fort in a Rescript that no credit shall be given to the letters of those who send accused persons to the Governor of a province, as having already been convicted.” The same thing has been provided with reference to Irenarchs, because it has been ascertained that all persons do not bring charges against others in good faith. 1But a Section of the Imperial Mandate is extant in which the Divine Pius, at the time when he commanded in the province of Asia, published in the form of an Edict, that when Irenarchs apprehended thieves they should question them with reference to their accomplices and associates, and that they should forward the interrogatories, reduced to writing and sealed, for the examination of the magistrate. Therefore, those who are sent under such circumstances should again be heard, even though they had been despatched with letters, or brought in by the Irenarchs. Thus, the Divine Pius and the other Emperors stated in Rescripts that proceedings should be taken as in a preliminary inquiry, even with reference to those who had been accused but not yet condemned, if anyone appeared to accuse them. Hence when an accusation is made, the Irenarch is required to appear and prosecute the charge which he has committed to writing, and if he does so diligently and faithfully, his action should be approved; but if he produces his evidence with little skill, it should be simply noted that the Irenarch had rendered an insufficient report. If, however, it should be ascertained that he has put the questions maliciously, and has not reported the answers as they were given, an example should be made of him, in order that he may not afterwards attempt anything of the same kind.

Dig. 48,17,1Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do pu­bli­co­rum. Di­vi Se­ve­ri et An­to­ni­ni mag­ni re­scrip­tum est, ne quis ab­sens pu­nia­tur: et hoc iu­re uti­mur, ne ab­sen­tes dam­nen­tur: ne­que enim in­au­di­ta cau­sa quem­quam dam­na­ri ae­qui­ta­tis ra­tio pa­ti­tur. 1Si au­tem gra­vius quis pu­nia­tur, pu­ta in opus me­tal­li vel si­mi­lem poe­nam si­ve ca­pi­ta­lem: hoc ca­su non est ir­ro­gan­da in ab­sen­tem poe­na, sed ab­sens re­qui­ren­dus ad­no­ta­tus est, ut co­piam sui prae­stet. 2Prae­si­des au­tem pro­vin­cia­rum cir­ca re­qui­ren­dos ad­no­ta­tos hoc de­bent fa­ce­re, ut eos quos ad­no­ta­ve­rint edic­tis ad­es­se iu­beant, ut pos­sit in­no­tes­ce­re eis quod ad­no­ta­ti sunt, sed et lit­te­ras ad ma­gis­tra­tus, ubi con­sis­tunt, mit­te­re, ut per eos pos­sit in­no­tes­ce­re re­qui­ren­dos eos es­se ad­no­ta­tos. 3Eex hoc an­nus com­pu­ta­tur ad se pur­gan­dos. 4Sed et Pa­pi­nia­nus li­bro sex­to de­ci­mo re­spon­so­rum scrip­sit re­qui­ren­dum ad­no­ta­tum si pro­vin­ciae prae­si­dem in­tra an­num ad­ie­rit et sa­tis ob­tu­le­rit, non es­se lo­cum man­da­tis, ut bo­na fis­co vin­di­cen­tur. nam et si in­tra an­num mor­tuus sit, cri­mi­nis cau­sa ex­pi­rat et per­it et bo­na eius ad suc­ces­so­res trans­mit­tun­tur.

Marcianus, Public Prosecutions, Book II. The Divine Severus and Antoninus stated in a Rescript that no one who is absent should be punished, and it is the present law that absent persons shall not be condemned; for the rule of equity does not suffer anyone to be convicted without being heard. 1If anyone is liable to severe punishment, for instance, if he may be condemned to labor in the mines, or to a similar penalty, or to a capital one, in this case the penalty must not be inflicted upon an absent person, but anyone who is absent and is sought for is recorded as being present. 2The Governors of provinces should follow this course with reference to defendants who are sought for, and noted as being present; namely, they should order them by Edicts to appear in order that those who have been mentioned as being present should become aware of the fact. They should also write to magistrates where the parties live, in order that, by their agency, those who are being sought for may ascertain that they have been recorded as being present. 3A year is computed from this date to enable them to purge themselves of contempt. 4And even Papinianus, in the Sixteenth Book of Opinions, says that he who is sought for, and noted as being present, must appear before the Governor of the province within twelve months, and furnish security; and that there is no reason to order that his property shall be confiscated to the Treasury, for if he should die within the year, the accusation of the crime will be extinguished, and come to an end, and the property of the party accused will be transmitted to his successors.

Dig. 48,17,3Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do de pu­bli­cis iu­di­ciis. quam­cum­que enim quaes­tio­nem apud fis­cum, si non alia sit pro­pria prae­scrip­tio, vi­gin­ti an­no­rum si­len­tio prae­scri­bi di­vi prin­ci­pes vo­lue­runt.

Marcianus, On Public Prosecutions, Book II. Any claim made by the Treasury is prescribed by a silence of twenty years, when there is no other prescription, as was established by the Divine Emperors.

Dig. 48,18,9Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do de iu­di­ciis pu­bli­cis. Di­vus Pius re­scrip­sit pos­se de ser­vis ha­be­ri quaes­tio­nem in pe­cu­nia­ria cau­sa, si ali­ter ve­ri­tas in­ve­ni­ri non pos­sit. quod et aliis re­scrip­tis ca­ve­tur. sed hoc ita est, ut non fa­ci­le in re pe­cu­nia­ria quaes­tio ha­bea­tur: sed si ali­ter ve­ri­tas in­ve­ni­ri non pos­sit ni­si per tor­men­ta, li­cet ha­be­re quaes­tio­nem, ut et di­vus Se­ve­rus re­scrip­sit. li­cet ita­que et de ser­vis alie­nis ha­be­ri quaes­tio­nem, si ita res sua­deat. 1Ex qui­bus cau­sis quaes­tio de ser­vis ad­ver­sus do­mi­nos ha­be­ri non de­bet, ex his cau­sis ne qui­dem in­ter­ro­ga­tio­nem va­le­re: et mul­to mi­nus in­di­cia ser­vo­rum con­tra do­mi­nos ad­mit­ten­da sunt. 2De eo, qui in in­su­lam de­por­ta­tus est, quaes­tio ha­ben­da non est, ut di­vus Pius re­scrip­sit. 3Sed nec de sta­tu­li­be­ro in pe­cu­nia­riis cau­sis quaes­tio ha­ben­da est ni­si de­fi­cien­te con­di­cio­ne.

Marcianus, On Public Prosecutions, Book II. The Divine Pius stated in a Rescript that torture could be inflicted upon slaves in cases where money was involved, if the truth could not otherwise be ascertained, which is also provided by other rescripts. This, however, is true to the extent that this expedient should not be resorted to in a pecuniary case, but only where the truth cannot be ascertained unless by the employment of torture is it lawful to make use of it, as the Divine Severus stated in a Rescript. Hence it is permitted to put the slaves of others to the question if the circumstances justify it. 1In cases in which torture should not be inflicted upon slaves to obtain evidence against their masters they cannot even be interrogated, and still less can the statements of slaves against their masters be admitted. 2Torture should not be inflicted upon one who is deported to an island, as the Divine Pius stated in a Rescript. 3Nor should it be inflicted, in a pecuniary case, upon a slave who is to be free under a condition, unless the condition fails to be fulfilled.

Dig. 48,19,11Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do de pu­bli­cis iu­di­ciis. Per­spi­cien­dum est iu­di­can­ti, ne quid aut du­rius aut re­mis­sius con­sti­tua­tur, quam cau­sa de­pos­cit: nec enim aut se­ve­ri­ta­tis aut cle­men­tiae glo­ria af­fec­tan­da est, sed per­pen­so iu­di­cio, pro­ut quae­que res ex­pos­tu­lat, sta­tuen­dum est. pla­ne in le­vio­ri­bus cau­sis pro­nio­res ad le­ni­ta­tem iu­di­ces es­se de­bent, in gra­vio­ri­bus poe­nis se­ve­ri­ta­tem le­gum cum ali­quo tem­pe­ra­men­to be­ni­gni­ta­tis sub­se­qui. 1Fur­ta do­mes­ti­ca si vi­lio­ra sunt, pu­bli­ce vin­di­can­da non sunt, nec ad­mit­ten­da est hu­ius­mo­di ac­cu­sa­tio, cum ser­vus a do­mi­no vel li­ber­tus a pa­tro­no, in cu­ius do­mo mo­ra­tur, vel mer­cen­na­rius ab eo, cui ope­ras suas lo­ca­ve­rat, of­fe­ra­tur quaes­tio­ni: nam do­mes­ti­ca fur­ta vo­can­tur, quae ser­vi do­mi­nis vel li­ber­ti pa­tro­nis vel mer­cen­na­rii apud quos de­gunt sub­ri­piunt. 2De­lin­qui­tur au­tem aut pro­pos­i­to aut im­pe­tu aut ca­su. pro­pos­i­to de­lin­quunt la­tro­nes, qui fac­tio­nem ha­bent: im­pe­tu au­tem, cum per ebrie­ta­tem ad ma­nus aut ad fer­rum venitur: ca­su ve­ro, cum in ve­nan­do te­lum in fe­ram mis­sum ho­mi­nem in­ter­fe­cit. 3Ca­pi­tis poe­na est bes­tiis ob­ici vel alias si­mi­les poe­nas pa­ti vel anim­ad­ver­ti.

Marcianus, On Public Prosecutions, Book II. It is the duty of the judge to be careful not to impose a sentence which is either more or less severe than the case demands; for neither a reputation for harshness, or the glory of clemency should be his aim; but, having carefully weighed the circumstances of the case, we should decide whatever the matter requires. It is clear that in cases of minor importance, judges should be inclined to lenity; and where heavier penalties are involved, while they must comply with the stern requirements of the laws, they should temper them with some degree of indulgence. 1Domestic thefts, if of trifling importance, should not be made the subject of public prosecutions; and an accusation of this kind ought not to be permitted when a slave is presented for trial by his master, or a freeman by his patron in whose house he lives, or a laborer by anyone who hires his services; for those are called domestic thefts which slaves commit against their masters, freedmen against their patrons, or hired laborers against those for whom they work. 2Moreover, a crime is committed either deliberately, or upon a sudden impulse, or by chance. Robbers commit a crime deliberately when they organize. Persons act by sudden impulse when they resort to violence, or to the use of weapons, through drunkenness. A crime is committed by chance, if one man kills another while hunting, when he aims a dart at a wild beast. 3To be thrown to wild beasts, or to suffer or be sentenced to similar punishments, are capital penalties.

Dig. 48,22,8Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do pu­bli­co­rum. sed ho­no­re qui­dem il­lum ar­ce­ri pu­to, ce­te­rum im­pen­dia de­be­re prae­sta­re.

Marcianus, Public Prosecutions, Book II. But I think that when he is deprived of the honor, he should be compelled to pay the expenses.

Dig. 48,22,10Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do pu­bli­co­rum iu­di­cio­rum. nec ta­men, ne ne­ces­sa­rias im­pen­sas fa­ciat.

Marcianus, Book. But not avoid incurring necessary expenses.

Dig. 48,24,2Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do pu­bli­co­rum. Si quis in in­su­lam de­por­ta­tus vel rele­ga­tus fue­rit, poe­na et­iam post mor­tem ma­net, nec li­cet eum in­de trans­fer­re ali­ubi et se­pe­li­re in­con­sul­to prin­ci­pe: ut sae­pis­si­me Se­ve­rus et An­to­ni­nus re­scrip­se­runt et mul­tis pe­ten­ti­bus hoc ip­sum in­dul­se­runt.

Marcianus, Public Prosecutions, Book II. If anyone has been deported to an island or relegated, his punishment continues to exist even after his death, for it is not permitted for him to be taken elsewhere and buried, without the consent of the Emperor; as Severus and Antoninus repeatedly stated in Rescripts, and they frequently granted this as a favor to many persons who requested it.

Dig. 50,4,7Mar­cia­nus li­bro se­cun­do pu­bli­co­rum. Reus de­la­tus et­iam an­te sen­ten­tiam ho­no­res pe­te­re prin­ci­pa­li­bus con­sti­tu­tio­ni­bus pro­hi­be­tur: nec in­ter­est, ple­be­ius an de­cu­rio fue­rit. sed post an­num, quam reus de­la­tus est, pe­te­re non pro­hi­be­tur, ni­si per ip­sum ste­tit, quo mi­nus cau­sa in­tra an­num ex­pe­di­re­tur. 1Eum, con­tra quem prop­ter ho­no­res ap­pel­la­tum est, si pen­den­te ap­pel­la­tio­ne ho­no­rem usur­pa­ve­rit, co­er­cen­dum di­vus Se­ve­rus re­scrip­sit. er­go et si is, qui ho­no­ri­bus per sen­ten­tiam uti pro­hi­bi­tus est, ap­pel­la­ve­rit, abs­ti­ne­re in­ter­im pe­ti­tio­ne ho­no­ris de­be­bit.

Marcianus, Public Prosecutions, Book II. A person who has been accused of crime is forbidden by the Imperial Constitutions to aspire to municipal honors before his case has been decided. It makes no difference whether he is a plebeian or a decurion. He cannot, however, be prevented from accepting such an office after a year has elapsed from the time when he was accused, unless he is to blame for the case not having been heard during the year. 1The Divine Severus stated in a Rescript that when a man is elected a magistrate, and his opponent appeals, and while the appeal is pending he takes possession of the office, he should be punished. Therefore, if anyone who is prevented by a decision from obtaining municipal honors takes an appeal, he should, in the meantime, refrain from demanding the office.

Fragmenta incerta

Dig. 48,20,11Mar­cia­nus li­bro ..... de pu­bli­cis iu­di­ciis. Si quis dam­na­tus ap­pel­la­ve­rit et pen­den­te ap­pel­la­tio­ne de­ces­se­rit, bo­na eius non pu­bli­can­tur: nam ita pos­te­rius quo­que tes­ta­men­tum eius ra­tum est. idem est et si ap­pel­la­tio non re­cep­ta est. 1Qui reus est non ma­ies­ta­tis, bo­na ad­mi­nis­tra­re pot­est et pe­cu­niam cre­de­re de­bi­tam­que si­bi re­ci­pe­re, si bo­na fi­de de­bi­to­res ei sol­vunt: in frau­dem au­tem quae alie­na­vit, post con­dem­na­tio­nem re­vo­can­tur.

The Same, Book. When anyone who has been convicted appeals, and dies while the appeal is pending, his property is not confiscated; for even a second will, if he should make one, will be valid. The same must be said even if the appeal is rejected. 1A defendant, except when accused of high treason, can administer his own property, pay his debts, and receive what is due to him, if it is paid in good faith; but every alienation which he has made for the purpose of defrauding the Treasury after his conviction can be set aside.