adire neque bonorum possessionem petere neque hereditatem ex fideicommisso suscipere aliter possunt nisi tutoris auctoritate, quamvis lucrosa sit neque ullum damnum habeat. Tutor autem statim in ipso negotio praesens debet auctor 2 fieri, si hoc pupillo prodesse existimaverit. post tempus vero aut per epistulam interposita auctoritas nihil agit. Si inter 3 tutorem pupillumve iudicium agendum sit, quia ipse tutor in rem suam auctor esse non potest, non praetorius tutor ut olim constituitur, sed curator in locum eius datur, quo interveniente iudicium peragitur et eo peracto curator esse desinit.

XXII.

QUIBUS MODIS TUTELA FINITUR.

Pupilli pupillaeque cum puberes esse coeperint, tutela liberantur. pubertatem autem veteres quidem non solum ex annis, sed etiam ex habitu corporis in masculis aestimari volebant. nostra autem maiestas dignum esse castitate tem

possessio, and hereditas fideicommissaria always comprised liabilities as well as rights, and though the latter might more than outbalance the former, yet on the general principle the pupil could incur no liability whatever without his tutor's auctoritas: cf. Seneca, nat. quaest. 2. 49, Dig. 24. 3. 58 17. 1. 32. The aditio of an inheritance had always been an actus legitimus, an act which by law was required to be personally performed, and which consequently could not be undertaken by the tutor alone on the pupil's behalf. In bonorum possessio, on the contrary, which being a praetorian institution was governed by more liberal rules, free representation was always permitted. By imperial enactment (Cod. 6.30. 18. 2-4 8. 18. 6) the tutor was allowed to make aditio for the pupil without any co-operation on the latter's part.

§ 3. Suits in which a pupil was a party might be undertaken by the tutor alone, or by the pupil himself with the former's auctoritas: 'sufficit tutoribus ad plenam defensionem, sive ipsi iudicium suscipiant, sive pupillus ipsis auctoribus... ita tamen, ut pro his, qui fari non possint vel absint, ipsi tutores iudicium suscipiant, pro his autem, qui supra septimum annum aetatis sunt et praesto fuerint, auctoritatem praestent' Dig. 26. 7. 1. 2.

The suit between tutor and ward contemplated in the text is one arising out of other matters than the guardianship, e.g. a will or intestacy under which both claimed to succeed. For the tutor praetorius see Gaius i. 173-187, Cod. 5. 44, and note on Tit. 14. 4 supr.

Tit. XXII. The precise age at which a male pupillus became pubes

porum nostrorum bene putavit, quod in feminis et antiquis impudicum esse visum est, id est inspectionem habitudinis corporis, hoc etiam in masculos extendere: et ideo sancta constitutione promulgata pubertatem in masculis post quartum decimum annum completum ilico initium accipere disposuimus, antiquitatis normam in feminis personis bene positam suo ordine relinquentes, ut post duodecimum annum completum 1 viripotentes esse credantur. Item finitur tutela, si adrogati sint adhuc impuberes vel deportati: item si in servitutem 2 pupillus redigatur vel ab hostibus fuerit captus. Sed et si usque ad certam condicionem datus sit testamento, aeque

had been disputed by the two schools of jurists: the Sabinians were in favour of determining it in each individual by reference to actual physical maturity, the Proculians of fixing fourteen years as the age in all cases: Javolenus Priscus inclined to combine both requirements, Ulpian, reg. 11. 28, Gaius i. 196. The constitution referred to by Justinian is in Cod. 5. 60. 3.

§ 1. The release of a pupillus from guardianship on being deportatus might be taken to support the theory that tutela was iuris civilis ; see note on Tit. 13. I supr. If the ward was taken captive a curator was usually appointed to look after his property, on the chance of his restoration by postliminium, Dig. 4. 6. 15. pr.

§ 2. The office of a testamentary guardian, who was appointed subject to a resolutive condition or a dies in quem (§ 5 inf.), determined on the fulfilment of the condition or the arrival of the dies. So too if he were appointed by a magistrate certae rei vel causae, he ceased to be guardian as soon as the purpose for which he had been nominated was attained, Dig. 26. 2. 10, Cod. 5. 44.

§ 4. The tutela legitima of an agnate was extinguished by his undergoing capitis minutio minima, because thereby he lost his agnatic character, so that the whole reason for his being tutor in that particular case fell away. The legitima tutela of cognates was not destroyed by this event: 'ex novis autem legibus... tutelae plerumque sic deferuntur, ut personae naturaliter designentur ' Dig. 4. 5. 7. pr.-A tutor who lost his liberty by capture in war might recover his office iure postliminii, Tit. 20. 2 supr.

In Dig. 4. 5.7 Paulus writes 'tutelas autem non amittit capitis minutio, exceptis his quae in iure alieno personis positis deferuntur.' Literally, these words would seem to mean that the tutela exercised by a filiusfamilias (under a testament or magisterial appointment) was extinguished by cap. dim. minima: but this is contradicted by Dig. 27. 3. 11, which expressly says that emancipation did not have this effect. Consequently, the commentators have either restricted the sense of the passage to capitis deminutio by datio in adoptionem (though that this should destroy

Simili 3

evenit, ut desinat esse tutor existente condicione. modo finitur tutela morte vel tutorum vel pupillorum. Sed 4 et capitis deminutione tutoris, per quam libertas vel civitas eius amittitur, omnis tutela perit. minima autem capitis deminutione tutoris, veluti si se in adoptionem dederit, legitima tantum tutela perit, ceterae non pereunt: sed pupilli et pupillae capitis deminutio licet minima sit, omnes tutelas tollit. Praeterea qui ad certum tempus testamento dantur 5 tutores, finito eo deponunt tutelam. Desinunt autem esse 6 tutores, qui vel removentur a tutela ob id quod suspecti visi sunt, vel ex iusta causa sese excusant et onus administrandae tutelae deponunt secundum ea quae inferius proponemus.

XXIII.

DE CURATORIBUS.

Masculi puberes et feminae viripotentes usque ad vicesimum quintum annum completum curatores accipiunt: qui, licet puberes sint, adhuc tamen huius aetatis sunt, ut negotia

tutela seems quite unreasonable) or have attempted to correct the passage so as to make it refer only to agnatic guardianship. An explanation of this kind is given without any emendation by a scholiast, who interprets the disputed words by saying τούτεστι τοῖς διαμείνασιν ὑπεξουσίοις μέχρι τῆς τοῦ πατρὸς τελευτῆς (hoc est, qui remanserunt in potestate usque ad mortem patris: i.e. the agnates).

Tit. XXIII. Cura, like tutela, was a munus publicum. A tutor's functions were partly of administration, partly of auctoritas: those of a curator related to administration only, so that he was not said, like the tutor, to be 'personae datus,' and it is the auctoritatis interpositio which forms the characteristic difference between the two: 'si tutoris auctoritas fuerit necessario... tutor ei necessario dabitur, quoniam curatoris auctoritas ad hoc inutilis est' Dig. 49. 1. 17. 1. The exact scope of the curator's administratio of course depended on the circumstances of the case sometimes he entirely managed the ward's property: sometimes he allowed him practically to manage it himself, and here he took no personal part in the business, having no power to interpose auctoritas : but his consensus was presumed, and his responsibility in no way dimi nished sometimes, as in the case of lunatics, he had charge of the ward's person also.

The cura of adolescentes or minors-i. e. persons between the ages of puberty and twenty-five years-originated in the lex Plaetoria, often mentioned by Plautus, who died B. C. 183, which subjected those who

1 sua tueri non possint. Dantur autem curatores ab isdem magistratibus, a quibus et tutores. sed curator testamento 2 non datur, sed datus confirmatur decreto praetoris vel praesidis. Item inviti adulescentes curatores non accipiunt praeterquam in litem: curator enim et ad certam causam dari 3 potest. Furiosi quoque et prodigi, licet maiores viginti quinque annis sint, tamen in curatione sunt adgnatorum ex

fraudulently overreached minors to a iudicium publicum entailing a pecuniary mulct and infamia on conviction. In the face of such a prosecution few people would be likely to give credit to minors or even to have any dealings with them whatsoever (Plautus, Pseudolus 1. 3. 9, Rudens 5. 4. 24): hence the rule was established (it is uncertain whether by the praetor or by the statute itself: Capitolinus Marc. 10 is in favour of the latter view) that minors who wished to contract or deal with others should be compellable to receive a curator on their application, by whose assent to the transaction the penal consequences of the lex Plaetoria would be avoided. M. Aurelius ordained that any minor, apart from such special occasion, should be able to obtain from the praetor a general curator to undertake the general administration of his property. A further protection afforded to minors against the consequences of their own inexperience or indiscretion was the praetorian practice of in integrum restitutio, for which see on Bk. iv. 6. 33 inf.

§ 1. Dio Cassius (44. 35) says that Julius Caesar appointed in his will éπITрóñоνs to Augustus 'qui propter provectiorem aetatem curatores fuerint:' these must have been magisterially confirmed. The reason why testamentary appointment of curators was never allowed was perhaps that in the earliest form of the institution (the cura of furiosi and prodigi) a causae cognitio was required in order to settle whether the person actually was furiosus and prodigus, and this would have seemed to admit an undue interference of the magistrate with testamentary power.

§ 2. This means only that a general curator could not be forced on a minor but he could be compelled to have one temporarily, ad certam causam, in two cases: that mentioned here in the text (a judgment against an undefended minor being void, Dig. 42. 1. 45. 6), and when his creditor wished to discharge his debt and obtain a release, Dig. 4. 4. 7.2.

Whether a minor who had a general curator could bind himself by contract without the latter's consensus is disputed. The general rule would seem to be that he could: 'puberes sine curatoribus suis possunt ex stipulatu obligari' Dig. 45. 1. 101, though, without it, he could not bind himself by an alienation, e.g. sale or pledge, Cod. 2. 22. 3. But even where he bound himself without the curator's consent the curator could not be compelled to satisfy the creditor out of the minor's property: and the latter could usually obtain in integrum restitutio from the praetor.

§ 3. The cura of furiosi and prodigi, which the XII Tables had given to

lege duodecim tabularum. sed solent Romae praefectus urbis vel praetor et in provinciis praesides ex inquisitione eis dare curatores. Sed et mente captis et surdis et mutis et qui 4 morbo perpetuo laborant, quia rebus suis superesse non possunt, curatores dandi sunt. Interdum autem et pupilli 5 curatores accipiunt, ut puta si legitimus tutor non sit idoneus, quia habenti tutorem tutor dari non potest. item si testamento datus tutor vel a praetore vel a praeside idoneus non sit ad administrationem nec tamen fraudulenter negotia administrat, solet ei curator adiungi. item in locum tutorum, qui non in perpetuum, sed ad tempus a tutela excusantur, solent curatores dari.

Quodsi tutor adversa valetudine vel alia necessitate im- 6

the agnates, went doubtless on default of the latter to the Gentiles, on the analogy of intestate succession: Cic. de invent. 2. 50, Varro, de re rust. I. 2. Appointment by the magistrate does not seem to have superseded this legitima cura, which is often spoken of as still in existence ('eo (legitimo) cessante, aut non idoneo forsitan existente, ex iudiciali electione curatorem ei dare necesse fuerit' Cod. 5. 70. 7. 6: cf. Dig. 27. 10. 13): it was resorted to only when the legitimi failed.

The interdiction of prodigals had been a matter of customary law even before the XII Tables, Dig. 27. 10. 1. pr. The prodigus was subjected to cura on an application to that effect being made to the praetor by his near relations: the form of interdiction is given by Paulus, sent. rec. 3. 4 a and 7 'moribus per praetorem bonis interdicitur hoc modo: quando tua bona paterna avitaque nequitia tua disperdis liberosque tuos ad egestatem perducis, ob eam rem tibi ea re commercioque interdico.' Under the early law the office belonged to the agnates only if the prodigus had succeeded his father ab intestato, Ulpian, reg. 12. 3. As to when furiosi and prodigi were released from cura cf. Dig. 27. 10. 1 ‘Et tamdiu ambo erunt in curatione, quamdiu vel furiosus sanitatem vel ille (prodigus) sanos mores receperit: quod si evenerit, ipso iure desinunt esse in potestate curatorum.'

§ 4. By mente capti, as distinct from furiosi, is meant to be expressed imbecility or weakness of intellect, in contrast with actual insanity: synonymous terms are stultus, fatuus, insanus. Such persons can have curators given them on application, because they cannot manage their own affairs, or even be relied on in the selection of agents: for Paulus says (sent. rec. 4. 12. 9) 'caeco curator dari non potest, quia ipse sibi procuratorem instituere potest.'

§ 5. For the maxim 'tutorem habenti tutor dari non potest' see on Tit. 20. pr. supr.

§ 6. For the actor' mentioned in this section see Dig. 26. 7. 24. pr., ib. 32. 6; 26. 9. 6; 46. 8. 9.

M