De obsequiis parentibus et patronis praestandis
(Concerning the respect which should be shown to parents and patrons.)
1 Ulpianus libro primo opinionum. Etiam militibus pietatis ratio in parentes constare debet: quare si filius miles in patrem aliqua commisit, pro modo delicti puniendus est. 1Et inter collibertos matrem et filium pietatis ratio secundum naturam salva esse debet. 2Si filius matrem aut patrem, quos venerari oportet, contumeliis adficit vel impias manus eis infert, praefectus urbis delictum ad publicam pietatem pertinens pro modo eius vindicat. 3Indignus militia iudicandus est, qui patrem et matrem, a quibus se educatum dixerit, maleficos appellaverit.
1 Ulpianus, Opinions, Book I. The filial affection due to parents should also be manifested by soldiers. Wherefore, if a son, who is a soldier, commits any improper act towards his father, he must be punished in proportion to his offence. 1Filial affection between a mother and a son who have been liberated from slavery together should be maintained in accordance with natural law. 2If a son, by the use of abusive language, should insult his father or his mother, whom it is his duty to respect, or should lay impious hands upon either of them, the Prefect of the City shall punish the crime, which affects public order, in proportion to its gravity. 3A son should be considered as unworthy to be a soldier, who calls his father and his mother, by whom he acknowledges that he has been brought up, malefactors.
2 Iulianus libro quarto decimo digestorum. Honori parentium ac patronorum tribuendum est, ut, quamvis per procuratorem iudicium accipiant, nec actio de dolo aut iniuriarum in eos detur: licet enim verbis edicti non habeantur infames ita condemnati, re tamen ipsa et opinione hominum non effugiunt infamiae notam. 1Interdictum quoque unde vi non est adversus eos reddendum.
2 Julianus, Digest, Book XIV. The respect due to parents and patrons is of such a character that an action for fraud or injury can not be granted against them, even though they may appear by an attorney; for although, by the terms of the Edict, if judgment be rendered against them, they might not be considered infamous; still, according to public opinion itself, they will not escape the imputation of infamy through the very proceeding. 1Judgment for forcible possession is also forbidden to be rendered against them.
3 Marcellus libro singulari responsorum. Titius puerum emit, quem post multos annos venire iussit: postea exoratus accepto ab eo pretio eum manumisit: quaero, an eum filius et heres manumissoris ut ingratum accusare possit. respondit posse, si nihil aliud esset impedimento: nam plurimum interesse, a suo servo quis vel etiam ab amico eius acceptis nummis dederit libertatem, an ab eo servo, qui cum esset alienus in fidem eius devenit. etenim ille etiamsi non gratuitum, beneficium tamen praestitit, iste nihil amplius quam operam suam accommodare videri potest.
3 Marcellus, Opinions. Titius purchased a boy slave, and after the lapse of several years ordered him to be sold, but subsequently having been begged to manumit him, did so, having received from him a sum of money as his value. I ask whether the son and heir of the master who manumitted him can accuse the freedman of being ungrateful. The answer was that he could, if there was no other obstacle; for it makes a great deal of difference where anyone has given freedom to his slave in consideration of money obtained from him, or from a friend of his, and where a slave, who had belonged to another, becomes his property and pays him a sum of money for his freedom. For the former confers a benefit upon him, although it is not gratuitous; the latter, however, can be considered to have done nothing more than to have lent him his aid.
4 Marcianus libro secundo publicorum iudiciorum. Per procuratorem ingratum libertum posse argui divus Severus et Antoninus rescripserunt.
4 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.
5 Ulpianus libro decimo ad edictum. Parens, patronus patrona, liberive aut parentes patroni patronaeve, neque si ob negotium faciendum vel non faciendum pecuniam accepisse dicerentur, in factum actione tenentur. 1Sed nec famosae actiones adversus eos dantur, nec hae quidem, quae doli vel fraudis habent mentionem,
5 Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book X. A parent, a patron, a patroness, or the children of relatives of the latter, will not be liable to an action in factum on account of a transaction, in which they are said to have received a sum of money, in consideration of either the performance or nonperformance of some act. 1Neither will actions implying moral turpitude, nor such as are based upon bad faith, or fraud, be granted against them.
6 Paulus libro undecimo ad edictum. nec servi corrupti agetur,
6 Paulus, On the Edict, Book XI. Nor can suit be brought against them for corrupting a slave:
7 Ulpianus libro decimo ad edictum. licet famosae non sint. 1Et in quantum facere possunt, damnantur. 2Nec exceptiones doli patiuntur vel vis metusve causa, vel interdictum unde vi vel quod vi patiuntur. 3Nec deferentes iusiurandum de calumnia iurant. 4Nec non et si ventris nomine in possessionem calumniae causa missa dicatur patrona, libertus hoc dicens non audietur, quia de calumnia patroni quaeri non debet. his enim personis etiam in ceteris partibus edicti honor habebitur. 5Honor autem his personis habebitur ipsis, non etiam interventoribus eorum: et si forte ipsi pro aliis interveniant, honor habebitur.
7 Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book X. Although such actions may not imply moral turpitude. 1And judgment shall be rendered against them only for the amount which they are able to pay. 2Nor can they be opposed by exceptions on the ground of bad faith, or for force, or fear, or by interdicts unde vi, or for any injury suffered through violence. 3When these persons tender an oath, they are not compelled to swear that this is not done maliciously. 4When a freedman alleges that his patroness has fraudulently been placed in possession of an estate in the name of her unborn child, he shall not be heard, because he cannot accuse his patroness of fraud, for such persons are entitled to respect; as is stated in the Sections of the Edict. 5Respect, however, is only due to them personally, and not to those who represent them; but if they themselves should appear for others, they will still be entitled to respect.
8 Paulus libro decimo ad edictum. Heres liberti omnia iura integra extranei hominis adversus patronum defuncti habet.
8 Paulus, On the Edict, Book X. The heir of a freedman is entitled to all the rights of a stranger against the patron of the deceased.
9 Ulpianus libro sexagensimo sexto ad edictum. Liberto et filio semper honesta et sancta persona patris ac patroni videri debet.
9 Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book LXVI. The persons of a father and a patron should always appear honorable and sacred in the eyes of a freedman and a son.
10 Tryphoninus libro septimo decimo disputationum. Nullum ius libertatis causa impositorum habet in mancipato filio, quia nihil imponi liberis solet. nec quisquam dixit iureiurando obligari filium patri manumissori ut libertum patrono: nam pietatem liberi parentibus, non operas debent.
10 Tryphoninus, Disputations, Book XVII. A father has no right to place any obligation upon his emancipated son, in consideration of having granted him his freedom, for the reason that nothing of this kind can be imposed upon children. Nor can anyone say that a son is bound by an oath to his father, who manumits him, in the same way as a freedman is to his patron, as children owe their parents affection and not menial services.
11 Papinianus libro tertio decimo responsorum. Liberta ingrata non est, quod arte sua contra patronae voluntatem utitur.
11 Papinianus, Opinions, Book XIII. A freedwoman is not considered ungrateful because she works at her trade in opposition to the wishes of her patron.