De aleatoribus
(Concerning Gamblers.)
1 Ulpianus libro vicensimo tertio ad edictum. Praetor ait: ‘Si quis eum, apud quem alea lusum esse dicetur, verberaverit damnumve ei dederit sive quid eo tempore dolo eius subtractum est, iudicium non dabo. in eum, qui aleae ludendae causa vim intulerit, uti quaeque res erit, animadvertam.’ 1Si rapinas fecerint inter se collusores, vi bonorum raptorum non denegabitur actio: susceptorem enim dumtaxat prohibuit vindicari, non et collusores, quamvis et hi indigni videantur. 2Item notandum, quod susceptorem verberatum quidem et damnum passum ubicumque et quandocumque non vindicat: verum furtum factum domi et eo tempore quo alea ludebatur, licet lusor non fuerit qui quid eorum fecerit, impune fit. domum autem pro habitatione et domicilio nos accipere debere certum est. 3Quod autem praetor negat se furti actionem daturum, videamus utrum ad poenalem actionem solam pertineat an et si ad exhibendum velit agere vel vindicare vel condicere. et est relatum apud Pomponium solummodo poenalem actionem denegatam, quod non puto verum: praetor enim simpliciter ait ‘si quid subtractum erit, iudicium non dabo.’ 4‘In eum’, inquit, ‘qui aleae ludendae causa vim intulerit, uti quaeque res erit, animadvertam.’ haec clausula pertinet ad animadversionem eius qui conpulit ludere, ut aut multa multetur aut in lautumias vel in vincula publica ducatur:
1 Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XXIII. The Prætor says: “Where anyone beats a person in whose house a game with dice is said to have taken place, or damages him in any way; or where anything at the time has been removed clandestinely from the house, I will not grant an action. Where anyone employs violence on account of a game with dice, I will punish him as the circumstances may demand.” 1Where gamblers rob one another, an action will not be refused on the ground of property taken by force; but it is only the host who is forbidden to bring suit, and not the gamblers, although they may seem to be unworthy of indulgence. 2It should also be noted that where the proprietor of the house has been beaten or has suffered loss, he cannot bring an action, no matter when or where this occurred, but theft can be committed with impunity in the house at the time when the gambling was going on, even though the party who commits any one of the offences may not have taken part in the game. It is certain that we must understand the term “house” to mean the habitation and domicile. 3Where the Prætor refuses to grant an action for theft, let us see whether this refers to the penal action alone, or whether the complainant wishes to introduce proceedings for the production of the property, or bring an action for recovery? It is stated by Pomponius that it is only the penal action which is refused, but this I do not think to be correct, as the Prætor says simply, “If anything has been removed clandestinely, I will not grant an action.” 4He says further: “Where anyone employs violence on account of a game with dice, I will punish him as the circumstances may demand.” This clause has reference to the punishment of a party who compels another to play, and signifies that he may be fined or sentenced to the quarries, or imprisoned in chains.
2 Paulus libro nono decimo ad edictum. solent enim quidam et cogere ad lusum vel ab initio vel victi dum retinent. 1Senatus consultum vetuit in pecuniam ludere, praeterquam si quis certet hasta vel pilo iaciendo vel currendo saliendo luctando pugnando quod virtutis causa fiat:
2 Paulus, On the Edict, Book XIX. For certain persons are accustomed to force others to play, sometimes doing this from the beginning, and sometimes, after they themselves are beaten, compelling them to remain. 1A Decree of the Senate forbids playing for money, except where the parties contend with spears, or by throwing the javelin, or in running, leaping, wrestling, or boxing, for the purpose of displaying courage and address:
3 Marcianus libro quinto regularum. in quibus rebus ex lege Titia et Publicia et Cornelia etiam sponsionem facere licet: sed ex aliis, ubi pro virtute certamen non fit, non licet.
3 Marcianus, Rules, Book V. In cases of this kind bets are allowed under the Titian, Publician, and Cornelian laws, but it is not lawful under other laws where the contest is not for the exhibition of skill.
4 Paulus libro nono decimo ad edictum. Quod in convivio vescendi causa ponitur, in eam rem familia ludere permittitur. 1Si servus vel filius familias victus fuerit, patri vel domino competit repetitio. item si servus acceperit pecuniam, dabitur in dominum de peculio actio, non noxalis, quia ex negotio gesto agitur: sed non amplius cogendus est praestare, quam id quod ex ea re in peculio sit. 2Adversus parentes et patronos repetitio eius quod in alea lusum est utilis ex hoc edicto danda est.
4 Paulus, On the Edict, Book XIX. Where anything is out on the table at a banquet members of the household are permitted to gamble for it. 1If a slave, or a son subject to paternal control loses, his father or his owner are entitled to recover what he lost. Moreover, if a slave has received money, an action De peculio will be granted against his master, but not a noxal action, because it is based on business transacted; but the defendant will not be compelled to pay more than the amount included in the peculium. 2An equitable action is granted under this Edict against the head of a household or a patron, for the recovery of money lost by games with dice.