Page images
PDF
EPUB

4 fuerunt, coeperunt alieno iuri subiecti esse, vel contra. Servus autem manumissus capite non minuitur, quia nullum caput 5 habuit. Quibus autem dignitas magis quam status permutatur, capite non minuuntur: et ideo senatu motos capite non minui

constat.

minutus, of his previous agnatic family. It is defined in this passage (which is taken from Gaius i. 162) as a status commutatio, a change of status unaccompanied by any loss of liberty or citizenship. Similarly Paulus says in Dig. 4. 5. 11 'cum et libertas et civitas retinetur, familia tantum mutatur, minimam esse capitis deminutionem constat,' ib. 3 'liberos, qui adrogatum parentem sequuntur, placet minui caput, quum in aliena potestate sunt, et quum familiam mutaverint,' ib. 7 'tutelas etiam non amittit capitis minutio: sed legitimae tutelae ex duodecim tabulis intervertuntur eadem ratione, qua et hereditates exinde legitimae, quia adgnatis deferuntur, qui desinunt esse familia mutati;' cf. 'minima capitis deminutio est, per quam et civitate et libertate salva status duntaxat hominis mutatur' Ulpian, reg. 11. 13. The practical coincidence of Gaius and Ulpian with Paulus in describing capitis deminutio minima as a mere change, and not necessarily a change for the worse, involving a degradation, and the fact that they differ from him only in being less clear and emphatic in their definition, is noteworthy, because writers who take a different view upon this subject from that here adopted contend that Paulus is the only jurist by whose writings the latter is supported.

In the law of Justinian's time, then, capitis deminutio minima occurred in the following cases: (1) where a person sui iuris became alieni iuris by adrogatio, legitimatio, and revocatio in patriam potestatem propter ingratitudinem. It may be objected that a person who is adrogated or legitimated may stand by himself in the world, and therefore have no familia to leave: but to this it may be replied that the Roman law regarded such a person as having a familia in virtue of his capacity to create one by marrying and begetting children, '... idemque eveniet et in eo qui emancipatus est: nam et hic sui iuris effectus propriam familiam habet' Dig. 5. 16. 195. 2. (2) Where a person alieni iuris entered a new family, e.g. the filiusfamilias given in adoptio plena, and the children of an adrogatus, legitimatus, or in patriam potestatem revocatus. (3) Where a person alieni became sui iuris by emancipation. For a discussion of another view upon this subject see Excursus I at the end of Book I, and for the effect of capitis deminutio minima on adrogatus' property, debts, etc. see Bk. iii. 10. 3 and notes inf.

§ 5. So status and dignitas are distinguished by Ulpian in Dig. 1. 5. 20 'qui furere coepit, et statum et dignitatem in qua fuit et magistratum et potestatem videtur retinere, sicut rei suae dominium retinet.'

Every Roman citizen was held in virtue of his citizenship to possess a certain dignity called his existimatio, which remained untarnished and

Quod autem dictum est manere cognationis ius et post 6 capitis deminutionem, hoc ita est, si minima capitis deminutio interveniat: manet enim cognatio. nam si maxima capitis deminutio incurrat, ius quoque cognationis perit, ut puta servitute alicuius cognati, et ne quidem, si manumissus fuerit, recipit cognationem. sed et si in insulam deportatus quis sit, cognatio solvitur. Cum autem ad adgnatos tutela pertineat, 7 non simul ad omnes pertinet, sed ad eos tantum, qui proximo gradu sunt, vel, si eiusdem gradus sint, ad omnes.

unimpaired so long as he did nothing to incur reproach from his fellow burghers, but which was capable of being either entirely destroyed or partially lost: 'existimatio est dignitatis illaesae status, legibus ac moribus comprobatus, qui ex delicto nostro auctoritate legum aut minuitur aut consumitur' Dig. 50. 13. 5. 1. Existimatio was said to be 'consumed' if its foundation, the civitas, were forfeited by either maxima or media capitis deminutio. In other cases, where a man had been guilty of such conduct as was held to justify a deprivation of some portion of his civil rights and privileges, he was said to be branded with ignominia or nota, and his existimatio to be 'diminished :''minuitur existimatio quotiens manente libertate circa statum dignitatis poena plectimur, sicuti cum relegatur quis, vel cum ordine movetur, vel cum prohibetur honoribus publicis fungi, vel cum plebeius fustibus caeditur, vel in opus publicum datur, vel cum in eam causam quis incidit, quae edicto perpetuo infamiae causa enumeratur' Dig. 50. 13. 5. 1-3. The oldest form of minutio existimationis can be traced back to an enactment probably comprised in the XII Tables, which declared citizens who committed certain crimes improbi and intestabiles: 'cum lege quis intestabilis iubetur esse, eo pertinet, ne eius testimonium recipiatur, et eo amplius, ut quidam putant, neve ipsi dicatur testimonium' Dig. 28. 1. 26. Similarly a man's existimatio was affected, though perhaps less permanently, by the subscriptio or nota censoria, for which see General Introd. p. 21. The commonest cause of minutio, however, was infamia, an institution doubtless known to the old civil law, but which, as may be gathered from the passage cited supr. from the Digest, was raised to an honourable prominence by the care with which the praetor used it as an instrument of morality and justice, and defined in the edict the circumstances under which it would attach, and the penalties and disabilities which it would entail, for both of which see on Bk. iv. 16. 2 inf. For a discussion of the question whether infamia ever operated as a capitis deminutio see Mr. Poste's note on Gaius i. 161.

XVII.

DE LEGITIMA PATRONORUM TUTELA.

Ex eadem lege duodecim tabularum libertorum et libertarum tutela ad patronos liberosque eorum pertinet, quae et ipsa legitima tutela vocatur: non quia nominatim ea lege de hac tutela cavetur, sed quia perinde accepta est per interpretationem, atque si verbis legis introducta esset. eo enim ipso, quo hereditates libertorum libertarumque, si intestati decessissent, iusserat lex ad patronos liberosve eorum pertinere, crediderunt veteres voluisse legem etiam tutelas ad eos pertinere, cum et adgnatos, quos ad hereditatem vocat, eosdem. et tutores esse iussit et quia plerumque, ubi successionis est emolumentum, ibi et tutelae onus esse debet. ideo autem diximus plerumque, quia, si a femina impubes manumittatur, ipsa ad hereditatem vocatur, cum alius est tutor.

XVIII.

DE LEGITIMA PARENTIUM TUTELA.

Exemplo patronorum recepta est et alia tutela, quae et ipsa legitima vocatur. nam si quis filium aut filiam, nepotem aut neptem ex filio et deinceps impuberes emancipaverit, legitimus eorum tutor erit.

Tit. XVII. Where a libertus civis died intestate, having no suus heres (the meaning of intestati in the text), the patron took his property as (by a fiction) his nearest agnate, and the tutela went in the same way on the analogy of the legitima adgnatorum tutela. But when a Latinus Iunianus (who could neither have a suus heres nor make a will) died, the patron took the property by a different title, iure peculii (bk. iii. 7. 4 inf.). Hence the succession of the tutela did not necessarily go together: 'unde si ancilla ex iure Quiritium tua sit, in bonis mea, a me quidem solo, non etiam a te manumissa, Latina fieri potest, et bona eius ad me pertinent, sed eius tutela tibi competit: nam ita lege Iulia cavetur' Gaius i. 167. This is another exception to the rule here stated by Justinian, ' plerumque ubi successionis est emolumentum, ibi et tutelae onus esse debet.' If a free person in mancipio were manumitted while impubes by his superior, there having been no fiducia (note on Tit. 12. 6 supr.) between the latter and the pater, the superior became patronus, and thus tutor legitimus. For some remarks on the 'interpretatio' of the XII Tables and other old statutes see General Introd. p. 45 supr.

Tit. XVIII. It does not seem that any express statute had conferred

XIX.

DE FIDUCIARIA TUTELA.

Est et alia tutela, quae fiduciaria appellatur. nam si parens filium vel filiam, nepotem vel neptem et deinceps impuberes manumiserit, legitimam nanciscitur eorum tutelam : quo defuncto si liberi virilis sexus extant, fiduciarii tutores filiorum suorum vel fratris vel sororis et ceterorum efficiuntur. atqui patrono legitimo tutore mortuo, liberi quoque eius legitimi sunt tutores: quoniam filius quidem defuncti, si non esset a vivo patre emancipatus, post obitum eius sui iuris efficeretur nec in fratrum potestatem recideret ideoque nec in tutelam, libertus autem si servus mansisset, utique eodem iure apud liberos domini post mortem eius futurus esset. ita tamen ii ad tutelam vocantur, si perfectae aetatis sint. quod nostra constitutio generaliter in omnibus tutelis et curationibus observari praecepit.

XX.

DE ATILIANO TUTORE VEL EO QUI EX LEGE IULIA

ET TITIA DABATUR.

Si cui nullus omnino tutor fuerat, ei dabatur in urbe quidem Roma a praetore urbano et maiore parte tribunorum

on the parens manumissor the tutela of children whom he emancipated while impuberes. It is said 'vicem legitimi tutoris sustinet' Dig. 26. 4. 3. 10, 'legitimus tutor habetur' Gaius i. 172; the latter stating as the reason 'quia non minus huic quam patronis honor praestandus est.'

Tit. XIX. Tutores fiduciarii are the male agnatic children of the parens manumissor, Gaius i. 175. As long as the old form of emancipation was in use the term was also applied to the extraneus manumissor, i.e. the person into whose mancipium the coemptionator or pater had conveyed the woman or child in power with the fiducia ‘ut manumittatur,' and (on his death) to his male agnatic descendants proximiore gradu, Gaius i. 166, Ulpian, reg. 11. 5. As Justinian expressly enacted that the father who emancipated a child in the new form introduced by him should have precisely the same rights as the old parens manumissor (Bk. iii. 2. 8 inf.), the legitima parentium tutela and the tutela fiduciaria of the parens manumissor's children were untouched: nor were they affected by the reforms of Nov. 118, which introduced a legitima cognatorum tutela only as a substitute for the old tutela of the agnates.

Tit. XX. The business of appointing guardians to persons who re

plebis tutor ex lege Atilia, in provinciis vero a praesidibus 1 provinciarum ex lege Iulia et Titia. Sed et si testamento tutor sub condicione aut die certo datus fuerat, quamdiu condicio aut dies pendebat ex isdem legibus tutor dari poterat. item si pure datus fuerit, quamdiu nemo ex testa

quired them, and who were not already provided, was not an ordinary function of any magistrate, and could therefore be exercised only in virtue of special statutory authorization: tutoris datio neque imperii est neque iurisdictionis, sed ei soli competit cui nominatim hoc dedit vel lex vel senatusconsultum vel princeps' Dig. 26. 1. 6. 2. The lex Atilia (the date of which was certainly earlier than 188 B.C., cf. Livy 39. 9) conferred this power, in the city of Rome, on the praetor urbanus acting in conjunction with the majority of the tribuni plebis (for other examples of joint action among the tribunes cf. Cic. in Verr. 2. 2. 41, Gellius 7. 19, Valerius Max. 6. 1.7.5.4); by the lex Iulia et Titia B. C. 31 it was extended to the praesides of provinces within their respective jurisdictions. Guardians thus appointed were called dativi, a term applied by Gaius (i. 154) and Ulpian (reg. 11. 14) to those appointed in a testament. Under Justinian they were thus given in the following cases : (1) When there was no other tutor, testamentary, statutory, or fiduciary. (2) When the person to whom the tutela naturally belonged was excluded by an 'excusatio necessaria,' or had some valid ground for exemption, Gaius i. 182, Ulpian, reg. 11. 23. (3) The cases referred to in § 1 of this Title. (4) Where a tutor was incapacitated, acquired a ground of excuse, or was removed on suspicion after actually entering on his functions: but if he died, or was capite minutus, the tutela devolved on the legitimi, Dig. 26. 2. 11. 3 and 4. (5) In one or two cases where an exception was allowed to the rule tutorem habenti tutor non datur, viz. (a) if there were several testamentary guardians of whom one died or was capite minutus a substitute was given by the magistrate, Dig. 26. 2. 11. 4; (b) where the tutor legitimus was a minor, deaf, dumb, insane, or absent for a case obsolete under Justinian see Tit. 21. 3 inf.

§ 1. When the effect of a disposition is made to depend on the occurrence or non-occurrence of some uncertain event in the future, even where that event is the ascertainment of some past or present fact, it is said to depend on a condition: where it is an occurrence, the condition is positive or affirmative: where a non-occurrence, it is negative. It may depend on a condition in two ways; a man may say, ' my disposition shall not take effect unless so and so occurs,' in which case the condition is suspensive; or, ' my disposition shall take effect at once, but that effect shall be stopped and cancelled if so and so occurs,' in which case the condition is resolutive. The importance of the latter class is mainly in relation to dispositions involving a transfer of property, in particular to the law of sale: the condition referred to in the text is suspensive. Some dispositions were by the Roman law completely void if made to depend on a condition or dies (for which see below); 'actus legitimi, qui non

« PreviousContinue »