quae in personam sunt, hae quidem quae ex contractu nascuntur fere omnes rei persequendae causa comparatae videntur: veluti quibus mutuam pecuniam vel in stipulatum deductam petit actor, item commodati, depositi, mandati, pro socio, ex empto vendito, locato conducto. plane si depositi agetur eo nomine, quod tumultus incendii ruinae naufragii causa depositum sit, in duplum actionem praetor reddit, si modo cum ipso apud quem depositum sit aut cum herede eius ex dolo ipsius agitur: quo casu mixta est actio. Ex maleficiis 18 vero proditae actiones aliae tantum poenae persequendae causa comparatae sunt, aliae tam poenae quam rei persequendae et ob id mixtae sunt. poenam tantum persequitur quis actione furti: sive enim manifesti agatur quadrupli sive nec manifesti dupli, de sola poena agitur: nam ipsam rem propria actione persequitur quis, id est suam esse petens, sive fur ipse eam rem possideat, sive alius quilibet: eo amplius adversus furem etiam condictio est rei. Vi autem bonorum 19 raptorum actio mixta est, quia in quadruplo rei persecutio continetur, poena autem tripli est. sed et legis Aquiliae actio de damno mixta est, non solum si adversus infitiantem in duplum agatur, sed interdum et si in simplum quisque agit. veluti si quis hominem claudum aut luscum occiderit, qui in eo anno integer et magni pretii fuerit: tanti enim damnatur, quanti is homo in eo anno plurimi fuerit, secundum iam traditam divisionem. item mixta est actio contra eos, qui relicta sacrosanctis ecclesiis vel aliis venerabilibus locis legati vel fideicommissi nomine dare distulerint usque adeo, ut etiam in iudicium vocarentur: tunc etenim et ipsam rem vel pecuniam quae relicta est dare compelluntur et aliud tantum pro poena, et ideo in duplum eius fit condemnatio.

persequimur quod ex patrimonio abest' Dig. 44. 7. 35; they are designed merely to redress and make reparation for the wrong by which they are called into operation. For depositum miserabile see p. 384 supr. The contractual actio redhibitoria (p. 423 supr.) was also penal, Dig. 21. I. 45, and so too was the action quasi ex contractu spoken of in § 19 ad fin. § 18. For the actio furti see p. 505 supr.

§ 19. For the 'mixed' character of the actions on vi bona rapta and damnum iniuria datum cf. Tit. 2. pr., Tit. 3. 9 supr. and notes. The latter would be merely rei persecutoria if the defendant admitted his liability in the abstract (§ 26 inf.), the iudicium being solely for the pur

20

21

Quaedam actiones mixtam causam optinere videntur tam in rem quam in personam. qualis est familiae erciscundae actio, quae competit coheredibus de dividenda hereditate: item communi dividundo, quae inter eos redditur, inter quos aliquid commune est, ut id dividatur: item finium regundorum, quae inter eos agitur qui confines agros habent. in quibus tribus iudiciis permittitur iudici rem alicui ex litigatoribus ex bono et aequo adiudicare et, si unius pars praegravari videbitur, eum invicem certa pecunia alteri condemnare.

Omnes autem actiones vel in simplum conceptae sunt vel in duplum vel in triplum vel in quadruplum: ulterius autem

pose of assessing the damages, and if the value of the slave killed (e.g.) had not been higher in the preceding year than at the actual moment of his death. For legacies ad pias causas cf. p. 445 supr. and § 26 inf.

§ 20. The functions of the judge in the iudicia divisoria are more fully described in Tit. 17. 4-6 inf. The explanation of their being partly real, partly personal, must be sought in the structure of their formula in the earlier period. This seems to have contained two intentiones, the first in rem concepta, and followed by an adiudicatio ('quantum adiudicari ex aequo et bono oportet iudex Titio adiudicato' Gaius iv. 42), the second concepta in personam, and followed by a condemnatio (e.g. tum quicquid ob eam rem alterutrum alteri dare facere oportet ex fide bona, eius iudex alterum alteri condemnato). Mutatis mutandis, the whole formula was repeated for each of the parties (e.g, each joint owner), whence Ulpian calls these actions mixtae in another sense: 'mixtae actiones, in quibus uterque actor est' Dig. 44. 7. 37. I. Under Justinian they are in reality in personam only, arising quasi ex contractu, Bk. iii. 27. 3 supr.: 'finium regundorum actio in personam est, licet pro vindicatione rei est' Dig.

IO. I. I.

The last named action, which was as old as the Twelve Tables, and had been regulated by a lex Mamilia and enactments of Constantine, Valentinian II. and Theodosius I, was in Justinian's time limited to disputes as to the boundaries of praedia rustica, Dig. 10. 1. 4. 10; the judge was assisted by experts (agrimensores) as assessors, and neither party could plead usucapio unless it had extended to thirty years.

§ 21. The expression in simplum, in duplum etc. concepta, which refers to the condemnatio, is another trace of the survival of the formula in the later procedure. Where a plaintiff sues for 'id quod sua interest' the action is in simplum concepta, though the amount of this may far exceed the verum rei pretium, Dig. 19. 1. 13. pr. Ulterius (quam in quadruplum) nulla actio extenditur' means no more than that in no action does the law direct the recovery of more than four times the penal unit; for sometimes the penalty will have no fixed relation to the value of the object, and so as a fact will be more than fourfold that value

nulla actio extenditur. In simplum agitur veluti ex stipula- 22 tione, ex mutui datione, ex empto vendito, locato conducto, mandato et denique ex aliis compluribus causis. In duplum 23 agimus veluti furti nec manifesti, damni iniuriae ex lege Aquilia, depositi ex quibusdam casibus: item servi corrupti, quae competit in eum, cuius hortatu consiliove servus alienus fugerit aut contumax adversus dominum factus est aut luxuriose vivere coeperit aut denique quolibet modo deterior factus sit (in qua actione etiam carum rerum, quas fugiendo servus abstulit, aestimatio deducitur): item ex legato, quod venerabilibus locis relictum est, secundum ea quae supra diximus.

(e.g. Cod. 6. 1. 7), or there may be two condemnations arising ex eadem re, which added together exceed the quadruplum, e. g. Dig. 47. 9. 3. 8. § 23. The action under the lex Aquilia is in duplum only adversus infitiantem, § 19 supr., and that on the deposit only under the circumstances referred to in § 17. The actio servi corrupti (for which cf. Tit. 1. 8 supr.) is said to be in duplum by the practor in Dig. 11. 3. I. pr.

§ 24. The libellus conventionis was a petition or bill addressed to the judge, by which actions were commenced under the system of cognitio in vogue in Justinian's time; and this is the sole meaning in his com. pilations of in ius vocatio and actionis editio. It had to contain short particulars of the plaintiff's claim, so as to give the defendant a general idea of the nature of the demand made against him, and to show more specifically (1) the character of the right affirmed, e. g. whether it was real or personal; if the former, whether dominium, servitus, pledge, etc.; if the latter, whether arising ex contractu or delicto, and what kind of contract or delict; (2) the thing or the wrongful act to which the action related. This statement of claim is what is now meant by intentio, e. g. in § 33 inf., cf. note on § I supr. It was necessary that it should be signed by the plaintiff, or by a notary on his behalf if he could not write; by this he definitely assumed the responsibility of the action, which, however, he more formally acknowledged by entering into a cautio, in one of the forms described in Tit. 11. 2 inf., which was enrolled in the acta, and by which he bound himself to bring the cause to trial within two months, or in default to pay the defendant double the costs which he had incurred, to push it through to judgment, and to pay the defendant's costs in the event of defeat. Unless the judge refused the action, the libellus was now registered in the acta, and the defendant was summoned (commonitio, citatio) by an officer of the court (executor, viator), a copy of the libellus being at the same time served upon him. In reply to this he had to deliver a signed and dated libellus contradictionis or responsionis, stating his defence, if any; to pay a fee (sportulae, referred to in this section) proportioned to the value of the matter in dispute, and to bind

24 Tripli vero, cum quidam maiorem verae aestimationis quantitatem in libello conventionis inseruit, ut ex hac causa viatores, id est exsecutores litium, ampliorem summam sportularum nomine exegerint: tunc enim quod propter eorum causam damnum passus fuerit reus, id triplum ab actore consequetur, ut in hoc triplo et simplum, in quo damnum passus est, connumeretur. quod nostra constitutio induxit, quae in nostro codice fulget, ex qua dubio procul est ex lege condicticiam 25 emanare. Quadrupli veluti furti manifesti, item de eo, quod metus causa factum sit, deque ea pecunia, quae in hoc data sit, ut is cui datur calumniae causa negotium alicui faceret vel non faceret item ex lege condicticia a nostra constitutione oritur, in quadruplum condemnationem imponens his exsecutoribus litium, qui contra nostrae constitutionis normam 26 a reis quicquam exegerint. Sed furti quidem nec manifesti actio et servi corrupti a ceteris, de quibus simul locuti sumus, eo differt, quod hae actiones omnimodo dupli sunt: at illae, id est damni iniuriae ex lege Aquilia et interdum depositi, infitiatione duplicantur, in confitentem autem in simplum dantur: sed illa, quae de his competit, quae relicta venerabilibus locis sunt, non solum infitiatione duplicatur, sed et si distulerit relicti solutionem, usque quo iussu magistratuum

himself by a cautio, usually with sureties, to appear in court on the day fixed for trial, and 'in iudicio permanere usque ad terminum litis' Tit. 11. 2. inf.; in default of this security he was liable to be placed under supervision, and even to be incarcerated, during the process. The day for trial was fixed by the plaintiff when he delivered his bill or libellus, but by an enactment of Justinian (Nov. 53. 3) the defendant was entitled to have an interval of at least twenty days.

For plus petitio by the plaintiff in his libellus conventionis see § 33 inf. The only other actions apparently which had been in triplum conceptae are those on furtum conceptum and oblatum, Gaius iii. 191, iv. 173, p. 500 supr. For statutory condictions see Dig. 13. 2. Justinian's enactment referred to is in Cod. 3. 10. 2. 2.

§ 25. For the actio quod metus causa see § 27 and notes inf.; and for calumnia Tit. 16. 1 inf. The words 'negotium alicui faceret' are from the edict (Dig. 3. 6. 1. pr.); the jurists seem to have restricted the negotium to actual litigation or prosecution, Dig. ib. 1. 6. 8 and 9. Justinian's constitution is in Cod. 3. 2. 4.

§ 26. See on Bk. iii. 27. 7 supr. The heir charged with legacies ad pias causas is penalised not only for inficiatio but for mora.

nostrorum conveniatur, in confitentem vero et antequam iussu magistratuum conveniatur solventem simpli redditur. Item 27 actio de eo, quod metus causa factum sit, a ceteris, de quibus simul locuti sumus, eo differt, quod eius natura tacite continetur, ut, qui iudicis iussu ipsam rem actori restituat, absolvatur. quod in ceteris casibus non ita est, sed omnimodo quisque in quadruplum condemnatur, quod est et in furti manifesti actione.

Actionum autem quaedam bonae fidei sunt, quaedam stricti 28 iuris. bonae fidei sunt hae: ex empto vendito, locato conducto, negotiorum gestorum, mandati, depositi, pro socio, tutelae, commodati, pigneraticia, familiae erciscundae, communi dividundo, praescriptis verbis, quae de aestimato proponitur, et ea, quae ex permutatione competit, et hereditatis.

§ 27. The Romans regarded dispositions made under the pressure of intimidation (as distinct from duress) as really voluntary: 'coactus voluit ' Dig. 4. 2. 21. 5; and the civil law therefore upheld them. They first became impeachable by the introduction of the praetorian actio quod metus causa, to support which, however, it was as a rule required that the threat should have been directed against the life, limb, or liberty of the plaintiff or some near relative, Dig. ib. 8. 3, and could have been carried out by the other. It was said to be in rem scripta, Dig. ib. 9. 8; i. e. it could be brought against any one who had profited by the intimidation: 'nec cuiquam iniquum videtur ex alieno facto alium in quadruplum condemnari, quia non statim quadrupli est actio, sed si res non restituatur' Dig. ib. 14. 3. The penal action in quadruplum was prescribed in a year; after that it was merely rei persecutoria, and was granted only causa cognita, after a preliminary investigation, Dig. ib. 14. I; against the heir it was not penal: 'licet enim poena ad heredem non transeat, attamen, quod turpiter vel scelere quaesitum est, ut est et rescriptum, ad compendium heredis non debet pertinere' Dig. ib. 16. 2. The plaintiff had other remedies in the exceptio metus, Tit. 13. 9 inf.: in integrum restitutio, § 33 inf., and in the ordinary actions on many

contracts.

§ 28. The origin of the distinction between actions stricti iuris and bonae fidei is described in Excursus X inf. The broad general divergence between them is well put by Cicero, pro Rosc. 4 'quid est in iudicio? directum, asperum, simplex: si paret... dari oportere. Quid est in arbitrio? mite, moderatum, quantum aequius melius, id dari.' But the expression actio stricti iuris, which does not occur elsewhere in the Corpus iuris, is unhappy, as tending to obscure the real character of the distinction; the ius is just as strictum in a bonae fidei action; what is strictum is the iudicium (§ 30 inf.). The principal specific points of difference are as follow: